ACDSee 32 print job - Coastal Resources Center

Koleksi Dokumen
Proyek Pesisir
1997 - 2003
Kutipan: Knight, M. dan S. Tighe, (editor) 2003. Koleksi Dokumen Proyek Pesisir 1997-2003;
Coastal Resources Center, University of Rhode Island, Narragansett, Rhode Island,
USA. (5 Seri, 30 Buku, 14 CR-ROM).
Koleksi Proyek Pesisir
–Kata Pengantar
S
elama lebih dari 30 tahun terakhir, telah terdapat ratusan program —baik internasional,
nasional maupun regional— yang diprakarsai oleh pemerintah, serta berbagai
organisasi dan kelompok masyarakat di seluruh dunia, dalam upaya menatakelola
ekosistem pesisir dan laut dunia secara lebih efektif. USAID (The United States Agency
for International Development) merupakan salah satu perintis dalam kerja sama dengan negaranegara berkembang untuk meningkatkan pengelolaan ekosistem wilayah pesisir sejak tahun 1985.
Berdasarkan pengalamannya tersebut, pada tahun 1996, USAID memprakarsai Proyek
Pengelolaan Sumberdaya Pesisir (Coastal Resources Management Project—CRMP) atau dikenal
sebagai Proyek Pesisir, sebagai bagian dari program Pengelolaan Sumberdaya Alam (Natural
Resources Management Program). Program ini direncanakan dan diimplementasikan melalui kerja
sama dengan Pemerintah Indonesia melalui Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional
(BAPPENAS), dan dengan dukungan Coastal Resources Center University of Rhode Island (CRC/
URI) di Amerika Serikat. Kemitraan USAID dengan CRC/URI merupakan kerja sama yang amat
penting dalam penyelenggaraan program-program pengelolaan sumberdaya pesisir di berbagai
negara yang didukung oleh USAID selama hampir dua dasawarsa. CRC/URI mendisain dan
mengimplementasikan program-program lapangan jangka panjang yang bertujuan membangun
kapasitas menata-kelola wilayah pesisir yang efektif di tingkat lokal dan nasional. Lembaga ini
juga melaksanakan analisis dan berbagi pengalaman tentang pembelajaran yang diperoleh dari
dan melalui proyek-proyek lapangan, lewat program-program pelatihan, publikasi, dan partisipasi
di forum-forum internasional.
Ketika CRC/URI memulai aktivitasnya di Indonesia sebagai mitra USAID dalam program
pengelolaan sumberdaya pesisirnya (CRMP, atau dikenal dengan Proyek Pesisir), telah ada
beberapa program pengelolaan pesisir dan kelautan yang sedang berjalan. Program-program
tersebut umumnya merupakan proyek besar, sebagian kecil di antaranya telah mencapai tahap
implementasi. CRC/URI mendisain Proyek Pesisir untuk lebih berorientasi pada implementasi
dalam mempromosikan pengelolaan wilayah pesisir dan tujuan-tujuan strategis USAID, seperti
pengembangan ekonomi dan keamanan pangan, perlindungan kesehatan masyarakat, pencegahan
konflik, demokrasi partisipatoris, dan perlindungan kelestarian lingkungan melalui pengelolaan
sumberdaya pesisir dan air.
Kegiatan Proyek Pesisir menempatkan Indonesia di garis depan pengembangan model baru dan
peningkatan informasi baru yang bermanfaat bagi Indonesia sendiri dan negara-negara lain di
dunia dalam hal pengelolaan sumberdaya pesisir. Sebagai negara keempat terbesar di dunia,
dengan kurang lebih 60 persen dari 230 juta penduduknya tinggal di dalam radius 50 kilometer
dari pesisir, Indonesia secara sempurna berada pada posisi untuk mempengaruhi dan
memformulasikan strategi-strategi pengembangan pengelolaan pesisir negara-negara berkembang
di seluruh dunia. Indonesia juga merupakan negara kepulauan terbesar di dunia dengan lebih dari
17.500 pulau, 81.000 kilometer garis pantai, dan Zona Ekonomi Ekslusif (ZEE) seluas 5,8 juta
2
CRMP/Indonesia Collection
–Preface
O
ver the past 30 years, there have been hundreds of international, national and subnational programs initiated by government, organizations and citizen groups that
attempted to more effectively govern the world’s coastal and marine ecosystems.
Among these efforts, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has
been a pioneer since 1985 in working with developing countries to improve the management of
their coastal ecosystem to benefit coastal people and their environment.
Building on its experience, as part of its Natural Resources Management Program, USAID initiated planning for the Indonesia Coastal Resources Management Project (CRMP, or Proyek Pesisir)
in 1996. This program was planned and implemented in cooperation with the Government of
Indonesia through its National Development Planning Agency (BAPPENAS) and with the support
of the Coastal Resources Center at the University of Rhode Island (CRC/URI) in the United States.
USAID’s partnership with CRC/URI has been central to the delivery of coastal resources management programs to numerous USAID-supported countries for almost two decades. CRC/URI designs and implements long-term field programs that work to build the local and national capacity to
effectively practice coastal governance. It also carries out analyses and shares experiences drawn
from within and across field projects. These lessons learned are disseminated worldwide through
training programs, publications and participation in global forums.
When CRC/URI initiated work in Indonesia as a partner with USAID in its international Coastal
Resources Management Program, there were numerous marine and coastal programs already
ongoing. These were typically large planning projects; few projects had moved forward into “onthe-ground” implementation. CRC/URI designed Indonesia’s CRMP to be “implementation oriented” in promoting coastal governance and the USAID strategic goals of economic development
and food security, protection of human health, prevention of conflicts, participatory democracy and
environmental protection through integrated management of coasts and water resources.
The CRMP put Indonesia in the forefront of developing new models and generating new information useful in Indonesia, and in other countries around the world, for managing coastal resources.
Being the fourth largest country in the world, with approximately 60 percent of its 230 million
people living within 50 kilometers of the coast, Indonesia is perfectly positioned to influence and
shape the coastal management development strategies of other developing countries around the
world. It is the world’s largest archipelago state, with 17,500 islands, 81,000 kilometers of coastline, and an Exclusive Economic Zone covering 5.8 million square kilometers of sea –more than
three times its land area. Indonesia is also the richest country in the world in terms of marine bio-
3
kilometer laut persegi -lebih tiga kali luas daratannya. Indonesia menjadi negara terkaya di dunia
dalam hal keragaman hayati (biodiversity). Sumber daya pesisir dan laut Indonesia memiliki arti
penting bagi dunia inernasional, mengingat spesies flora dan fauna yang ditemukan di perairan
tropis Indonesia lebih banyak daripada kawasan manapun di dunia. Sekitar 24 persen dari produksi
ekonomi nasional berasal dari industri-industri berbasis wilayah pesisir, termasuk produksi gas
dan minyak, penangkapan ikan, pariwisata, dan transportasi. Beragam ekosistem laut dan pesisir
yang ada menyediakan sumberdaya lestari bagi sebagian besar rakyat Indonesia. Hasil-hasil
lautnya mencukupi lebih dari 60 persen rata-rata kebutuhan bahan protein penduduk secara
nasional, dan hampir 90 persen di sebagian desa pesisir. Masyarakat nelayan pedesaan cenderung
menjadi bagian dari kelompok masyarakat termiskin akibat eksploitasi berlebihan, degradasi
sumberdaya, serta ketidakmampuan dan kegagalan mereka memanfaatkan sumberdaya pesisir
secara berkelanjutan.
Di bawah bimbingan CRC/URI, Proyek Pesisir, yang berkantor pusat di Jakarta, bekerja sama
erat dengan para pengguna sumberdaya, masyarakat, industri, LSM, kelompok-kelompok ilmiah,
dan seluruh jajaran pemerintahan. Program-program lapangan difokuskan di Sulawesi Utara,
Kalimantan Timur, dan Provinsi Lampung (sebelah selatan Sumatera) ditambah Provinsi Papua
pada masa akhir proyek. Selain itu, dikembangkan pula pusat pembelajaran pada Pusat Kajian
Sumberdaya Pesisir dan Lautan (PKSPL) di Institut Pertanian Bogor (IPB), sebagai perguruan
tinggi yang menjadi mitra implementasi Proyek Pesisir dan merupakan fasilitator dalam
pengembangan Jaringan Universitas Pesisir Indonesia (INCUNE).
Komponen program CRMP yang begitu banyak dikembangkan dalam 3 (tiga) lingkup strategi
pencapaian tujuan proyek. Pertama, kerangka kerja yang mendukung upaya-upaya pengelolaan
berkelanjutan, telah dikembangkan. Kemudian, ketika proyek-proyek percontohan telah rampung,
pengalam an-pengalam an dan teladan bai k dar i kegiata n-kegia tan ter sebut
didokumentasikan dan dilembagakan dalam pemerintahan, sebagai lembaga yang
bertanggung jawab dalam jangka panjang untuk melanjutkan hasil yang sudah ada sekaligus
menambah lokasi baru. Kegiatan ini dilakukan lewat kombinasi perangkat hukum, panduan,
dan pelatihan. Kedua, Departemen Kelautan dan Perikanan yang baru berdiri didukung untuk
mengembangkan peraturan perundangan dan panduan pengelolaan wilayah pesisir nasional
untuk pengelolaan pesisir terpadu yang terdesentralisasi. Pengembangan peraturan
perundangan ini dilakukan melalui suatu proses konsultasi publik yang partisipatif, terbuka dan
melembaga, yang berupaya mengintegrasikan inisiatif-inisiatif pengelolaan wilayah pesisir secara
vertikal dan horisontal. Ketiga, proyek ini mengakui dan berupaya memperkuat peran khas yang
dijalankan oleh perguruan tinggi dalam mengisi kesenjangan kapasitas pengelolaan wilayah
pesisir.
Strategi-strategi tersebut didasarkan pada prinsip-prinsip:
• Partisipasi luas dari berbagai pemangku kepentingan (stakeholders) dan pemberdayaan mereka
dalam pengambilan keputusan
• Koordinasi efektif berbagai sektor, antara masyarakat, dunia usaha, dan LSM pada berbagai
tingkatan
• Penitikberatan pada pengelolaan yang terdesentralisasi dan kesesuaian antara pengelolaan/
pengaturan di tingkat lokal dan nasional
• Komitmen untuk menciptakan dan memperkuat kapasitas organisasi dan sumberdaya
manusia untuk pengelolaan pesisir terpadu yang berkelanjutan
• Pembuatan kebijakan yang lebih baik yang berbasis informasi dan ilmu pengetahuan
Di Sulawesi Utara, fokus awal Proyek Pesisir terletak pada pengembangan praktik-praktik terbaik
pengelolaan pesisir terpadu berbasis masyarakat, termasuk pembuatan dan implementasi rencana
daerah perlindungan laut (DPL), daerah perlindungan mangrove (DPM), dan pengelolaan pesisir
tingkat desa, serta pemantauan hasil-hasil proyek dan kondisi wilayah pesisir. Untuk melembagakan
kegiatan-kegiatan yang sukses ini, dan dalam rangka memanfaatkan aturan otonomi daerah yang
baru diberlakukan, Proyek Pesisir membantu penyusunan peraturan pengelolaan wilayah pesisir,
baik berupa Peraturan Desa, Peraturan Daerah (Perda) Kabupaten, maupun Perda Provinsi. Selain
itu, dikembangkan pula perangkat informasi sebagai alat bagi pengelolaan wilayah pesisir, seperti
pembuatan atlas wilayah pesisir. Dalam kurun waktu 18 bulan terakhir, kegiatan perluasan program (scaling up) juga telah berhasil diimplementasikan di 25 desa pesisir di Kecamatan Likupang
4
diversity. Indonesia’s coastal and marine resources are of international importance with more plant
and animal species found in Indonesia’s waters than in any other region of the world. Approximately 24 percent of national economic output is from coastal-based industries such as oil and
gas production, fishing, tourism and transportation. Coastal and marine ecosystems provide subsistence resources for many Indonesians, with marine products comprising on average more than
60 percent of the protein intake by people, and nearly 90 percent in some coastal villages. Rural
coastal communities tend to be among the poorest because of overexploitation and degradation
of resources resulting from their inability to sustainably and successfully plan for and manage their
coastal resources.
Under the guidance of CRC/URI, the Jakarta-based CRMP worked closely with resource users,
the community, industry, non-governmental organizations, academic groups and all levels of government. Field programs were focused in North Sulawesi, East Kalimantan, and Lampung Province in South Sumatra, with an additional site in Papua in the last year of the project. In addition, a
learning center, the Center for Coastal and Marine Resources Studies, was established at Bogor
Agricultural Institute, a CRMP implementation partner and facilitator in developing the elevenmember Indonesia Coastal University Network (INCUNE).
The many components of the CRMP program were developed around three strategies for achieving the project’s goals. First, enabling frameworks for sustained management efforts were developed. Then, as pilot projects were completed, experiences and good practices were documented and institutionalized within government, which has the long-term responsibility to both
sustain existing sites and launch additional ones. This was done through a combination of legal
instruments, guidebooks and training. Second, the new Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries (MMAF) was supported to develop a national coastal management law and guidelines for
decentralized integrated coastal management (ICM) in a widely participatory, transparent and
now institutionalized public consultative process that attempted to vertically and horizontally integrate coastal management initiatives. Finally, the project recognized and worked to strengthen
the unique role that universities play in filling the capacity gap for coastal management.
The strategies were based on several important principles:
• Broad stakeholder participation and empowerment in decision making
• Effective coordination among sectors, between public, private and non-governmental entities
across multiple scales
• Emphasis on decentralized governance and compatibility between local and national governance
• Commitment to creating and strengthening human and organizational capacity for sustainable ICM
• Informed and science-based decision making
In North Sulawesi, the early CRMP focus was on developing community-based ICM best practices including creating and implementing marine sanctuaries, mangrove sanctuaries and villagelevel coastal management plans, and monitoring project results and coastal conditions. In order to
institutionalize the resulting best practices, and to take advantage of new decentralized authorities, the CRMP expanded activities to include the development of village, district and provincial
coastal management laws and information tools such as a coastal atlas. In the last 18 months of
the project, a scaling-up program was successfully implemented that applied community-based
ICM lessons learned from four original village pilot sites to Likupang sub-district (kecamatan) with
25 coastal villages. By the end of the project, Minahasa district was home to 25 community coral
reef sanctuaries, five mangrove sanctuaries and thirteen localized coastal management plans. In
5
Barat dan Timur. Perluasan program ini dilakukan dengan mempraktikkan berbagai hasil
pembelajaran mengenai pengelolaan pesisir terpadu berbasis masyarakat dari 4 lokasi percontohan
awal (Blongko, Bentenan, Tumbak, dan Talise). Pada akhir proyek, Kabupaten Minahasa telah
memiliki 25 DPL, 5 DPM, dan 13 rencana pengelolaan pesisir tingkat desa yang telah siap
dijalankan. Sulawesi Utara juga telah ditetapkan sebagai pusat regional untuk Program Kemitraan
Bahari berbasis perguruan tinggi, yang disponsori oleh Departemen Kelautan dan Perikanan dan
difasilitasi oleh Proyek Pesisir.
Di Kalimantan Timur, fokus dasar Proyek Pesisir adalah pengenalan model pengelolaan pesisir
berbasis Daerah Aliran Sungai (DAS), yang menitikberatkan pada rencana pengelolaan terpadu
Teluk Balikpapan dan DAS-nya. Teluk Balikpapan merupakan pintu gerbang bisnis dan industri
Provinsi Kalimantan Timur. Rencana Pengelolaaan Teluk Balikpapan (RPTB) berbasis DAS yang
bersifat interyurisdiksi ini merupakan yang pertama kalinya di Indonesia dan menghasilkan sebuah
model untuk dapat diaplikasikan oleh pemerintah daerah lainnya. Rencana pengelolaan tersebut,
yang dirampungkan dengan melibatkan partisipasi dan konsultasi masyarakat lokal secara luas,
dalam implementasinya telah berhasil menghentikan konversi lahan mangrove untuk budidaya
udang di sebuah daerah delta, terbentuknya kelompok kerja (pokja) terpadu antarinstansi untuk
masalah erosi dan mangrove, terbentuknya sebuah Organisasi Non Pemerintah (Ornop) berbasis
masyarakat yang pro aktif, dan jaringan Ornop yang didanai oleh sektor swasta yang berfokus
pada isu-isu masyarakat pesisir. Selain itu, telah terbentuk Badan Pengelola Teluk Balikpapan,
yang dipimpin langsung oleh Gubernur Kalimantan Timur berikut 3 Bupati (Penajam Paser Utara,
Pasir, dan Kutai Kartanegara), dan Walikota Balikpapan. Seluruh kepala daerah tersebut, bersama
dengan Menteri Kelautan dan Perikanan RI, ikut menandatangani Rencana Pengelolaan Teluk
Balikpapan tersebut. Rencana Pengelolaan Teluk Balikpapan ini telah mendorong pemerintah
daerah lain untuk memulai program-program serupa. Kalimantan Timur juga telah ditetapkan
sebagai pusat regional untuk Program Kemitraan Bahari berbasis perguruan tinggi, yang disponsori
oleh Departemen Kelautan dan Perikanan, dan difasilitasi oleh Proyek Pesisir.
Di Lampung, kegiatan Proyek Pesisir berfokus pada proses penyusunan rencana dan pengelolaan
strategis provinsi secara partisipatif. Upaya ini menghasilkan Atlas Sumberdaya Pesisir Lampung,
yang untuk pertama kalinya menggambarkan kualitas dan kondisi sumberdaya alam suatu provinsi
melalui kombinasi perolehan informasi terkini dan masukan dari 270 stakeholders setempat, serta
60 organisasi pemerintah dan non pemerintah. Atlas tersebut menyediakan landasan bagi
pengembangan sebuah rencana strategis pesisir dan progam di Lampung, dan sarana
pembelajaran bagi Pusat Kajian Sumberdaya Pesisir dan Lautan (PKSPL) IPB, yang telah
menangani program pengelolaan pesisir di Lampung. Sebagai contoh kegiatan pelaksanaan awal
tingkat lokal dari Rencana Strategis Pesisir Provinsi Lampung, dua kegiatan berbasis masyarakat
telah berhasil diimplementasikan.Satu berlokasi di Pematang Pasir, dengan titik berat pada praktik
budidaya perairan yang berkelanjutan, dan yang lainnya berlokasi di Pulau Sebesi di Teluk Lampung,
dengan fokus pada pembentukan dan pengelolaan daerah perlindungan laut (DPL). Model Atlas
Sumberdaya Pesisir Lampung tersebut belakangan telah direplikasi oleh setidaknya 9 (sembilan)
provinsi lainnya di Indonesia dengan menggunakan anggaran provinsi masing-masing.
Di Papua, pada tahun terakhir Proyek Pesisir, sebuah atlas pesisir untuk kawasan Teluk Bintuni yang disusun berdasarkan penyusunan Atlas Lampung-telah diproduksi Kawasan ini merupakan
daerah yang lingkungannya sangat penting, yang tengah berada pada tahap awal aktivitas
pembangunan besar-besaran. Teluk Bintuni berlokasi pada sebuah kabupaten baru yang memiliki
sumberdaya alam melimpah, termasuk cadangan gas alam yang sangat besar, serta merupakan
daerah yang diperkirakan memiliki paparan mangrove terbesar di Asia Tenggara. Proses
penyusunan atlas sumberdaya pesisir kawasan Teluk Bintuni ini dilaksanakan melalui kerja sama
dengan Ornop lokal, perusahaan minyak BP, dan Universitas Negeri Papua (UNIPA). Kegiatan ini
mengawali sebuah proses perencanaan partisipatif dan pengelolaan pesisir terpadu, yang
mengarah kepada mekanisme-mekanisme perencanaan partisipatif untuk sumberdaya pesisir di
kawasan tersebut. Para mitra-mitra lokal telah menunjukkan ketertarikan untuk menggunakan
Atlas Teluk Bintuni sebagai rujukan awal (starting point) dalam mengembangkan ‘praktik-praktik
terbaik’ mereka sendiri, misalnya pengelolaan pesisir berbasis masyarakat dan pengelolaan teluk
berbasis DAS bagi Teluk Bintuni.
6
the last few months, due to its significant capacity in coastal management, North Sulawesi was
inaugurated as a founding regional center for the new national university-based Sea Partnership
Program sponsored by the MMAF and facilitated by the CRMP.
In East Kalimantan, the principal CRMP focus was on introducing a model for watershed-based
coastal management focusing on developing an integrated coastal management plan for Balikpapan
Bay and its watershed. Balikpapan Bay is the commercial and industrial hub of East Kalimantan
Province. The resulting inter-jurisdictional watershed-based Balikpapan Bay Management Plan
(BBMP) was the first of its kind in Indonesia and provides a model for other regional governments.
The BBMP, completed with extensive local participation and consultation, has already resulted in
a moratorium on shrimp mariculture in one delta region, the creation of mangrove and erosion
interdepartmental working groups, a new proactive community-based NGO and a NGO-network
supported by private sector funding that is focused on coastal community issues. The BBMP also
resulted in the formation of the Balikpapan Bay Management Council, chaired by the Provincial
Governor and including the heads of three districts (Panajam Paser Utara, Pasir and Kutai
Kartengara), the Mayor of the City of Balikpapan and the Minister of Marine Affairs and Fisheries,
who were all co-signatories to the BBMP. The BBMP has already stimulated other regional governments to start on similar programs. In the last few months, East Kalimantan was also inaugurated as a founding regional center for the new national university-based Sea Partnership Program sponsored by the MMAF and facilitated by the CRMP.
In Lampung, the CRMP focused on establishing a participatory provincial strategic planning and
management process. This resulted in the ground-breaking Lampung Coastal Resources Atlas,
which defines for the first time the extent and condition of the province’s natural resources through
a combination of existing information and the input of over 270 local stakeholders and 60 government and non-government organizations. The atlas provided the foundation for the development
of a Lampung coastal strategic plan and the program served as a learning site for Bogor Agricultural Institute’s Center for Coastal and Marine Resources Studies that has since adopted the
management of the Lampung coastal program. As a demonstration of early local actions under the
Lampung Province Coastal Strategic Plan, two community-based initiatives - one in Pematang
Pasir with an emphasis on sustainable aquaculture good practice, and the other on Sebesi Island
in Lampung Bay focused on marine sanctuary development and management - were implemented.
The atlas model was later replicated by at least nine other provinces using only provincial government funds.
In Papua, in the final year of Proyek Pesisir, a coastal atlas based upon the Lampung atlas format
was produced for Bintuni Bay, an environmentally important area that is in the early stages of
major development activities. Bintuni Bay is located within the newly formed Bintuni District that is
rich in natural resources, including extensive natural gas reserves, and perhaps the largest contiguous stand of mangroves in Southeast Asia. The atlas development process was implemented
in cooperation with local NGOs, the petroleum industry (BP) and the University of Papua and
began a process of participatory planning and integrated coastal management that is leading to
mechanisms of participatory planning for the coastal resources in the area. Local partners have
expressed their interest in using the Bintuni Bay atlas as a starting point for developing their own
set of “best practices” such as community-based coastal management and multi-stakeholder,
watershed-based bay management for Bintuni Bay.
7
Pengembangan Universitas merupakan aspek penting dari kegiatan Proyek Pesisir dalam
mengembangkan pusat keunggulan pengelolaan pesisir melalui sistem Perguruan Tinggi di Indonesia, dan memanfaatkan pusat ini untuk membangun kapasitas universitas-universitas lain di
Indonesia. Pusat Kajian Sumberdaya Pesisir dan Laut (PKSPL) yang dikembangkan di Institut
Pertanian Bogor (IPB) telah dipilih sebagai mira utama, mengingat posisinya sebagai institusi
pengelolaan sumberdaya alam utama di Indonesia. Selain mengelola Lampung sebagai daerah
kajian, PKSPL-IPB mendirikan perpustakaan sebagai referensi pengelolaan pesisir terpadu
nasional, yang terbuka bagi para mahasiswa dan kalangan profesional, serta menyediakan layanan
peminjaman perpustakaan antaruniversitas untuk berbagai perguruan tinggi di Indonesia (situs
web: http://www.indomarine.or.id). PKSPL-IPB telah memprakarsai lokakarya tahunan pembelajaran
pengelolaan pesisir terpadu, penerbitan jurnal pesisir nasional, serta bekerja sama dengan Proyek
Pesisir mengadakan Konferensi Nasional (KONAS) Pengelolaan Pesisir Terpadu, yang kini menjadi
ajang utama bagi pertukaran informasi dan studi kasus pengelolaan pesisir terpadu di Indonesia.
Kegiatan dua tahunan tersebut dihadiri 600 peserta domestik dan internasional. Berdasarkan
pengalaman positif dengan IPB dan PKSPL tersebut, telah dibentuk sebuah jaringan universitas
yang menangani masalah pengelolaan pesisir yaitu INCUNE (Indonesian Coastal Universities
Network), yang beranggotakan 11 universitas. Jaringan ini menyatukan universitas-universitas di
wilayah pesisir di seluruh Indonesia, yang dibentuk dengan tujuan untuk pertukaran informasi,
riset, dan pengembangan kapasitas, dengan PKSPL-IPB berperan sebagai sekretariat. Selain
INCUNE, Proyek Pesisir juga memegang peranan penting dalam mengembangkan Program
Kemitraan Bahari (PKB) di Indonesia, mengambil contoh keberhasilan Program Kemitraan Bahari
(Sea Grant College Program) di Amerika Serikat. Program ini mencoba mengembangkan kegiatan
penjangkauan, pendidikan, kebijakan, dan riset terapan wilayah pesisir di berbagai universitas
penting di kawasan pesisir Indonesia. Program Kemitraan Bahari menghubungkan universitas di
daerah dengan pemerintah setempat melalui isu-isu yang menyentuh kepentingan pemerintah
lokal dan masyarakat, serta berupaya mengatasi kesenjangan dalam kapasitas perorangan dan
kelembagaan di daerah.
Proyek Pesisir mengembangkan usaha-usaha di tingkat nasional untuk memanfaatkan peluangpeluang baru yang muncul, seiring diberlakukannya Undang-Undang tentang Otonomi Daerah.
Pada periode 2000-2003, Proyek Pesisir bekerja sama dengan Departemen Kelautan dan
Perikanan, BAPPENAS, instansi nasional lainnya, pemerintah daerah, lembaga swadaya
masyarakat (LSM), dan perguruan tinggi dalam menyusun rancangan undang-undang pengelolaan
wilayah pesisir (RUU PWP). Rancangan undang-undang ini merupakan salah satu rancangan
undang-undang yang disusun secara partisipatif dan transparan sepanjang sejarah Indonesia.
Saat ini RUU tersebut sedang dipertimbangkan oleh Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat (DPR). RUU disusun
berbasis insentif dan bertujuan untuk mendukung pemerintah daerah, LSM, dan masyarakat lokal
dalam memperoleh hak-hak mereka yang berkaitan dengan isu-isu desentralisasi daerah dalam
pengelolaan pesisir. Dukungan lain yang diberikan Proyek Pesisir kepada Departemen Kelautan
dan Perikanan adalah upaya mengembangkan kapasitas dari para staf, perencanaan strategis,
dan dibentuknya program baru yang bersifat desentralistik seperti Program Kemitraan Bahari.
Koleksi dokumen dan bahan bacaan ini bertujuan untuk mendokumentasikan pengalamanpengalaman Proyek Pesisir dalam mengelola wilayah pesisir, memberikan kesempatan yang lebih
luas kepada publik untuk mengaksesnya, serta untuk mentransfer dokumen tersebut kepada seluruh
mitra, rekan kerja, dan sahabat-sahabat Proyek Pesisir di Indonesia. Produk utama dari koleksi ini
adalah Pembelajaran dari Dunia Pengelolaan Pesisir di Indonesia, yang dibuat dalam bentuk
Compact Disc-Read Only Memory (CD-ROM), berisikan gambaran umum mengenai Proyek Pesisir
dan produk-produk penting yang dihasilkannya. Adapun Koleksi Proyek Pesisir ini terbagi kedalam
5 tema, yaitu:
• Seri Reformasi Hukum, berisikan pengalaman dan panduan Proyek Pesisir tentang proses
penyusunan rancangan undang-undang/peraturan kabupaten, provinsi, dan nasional yang
berbasis masyarakat, serta kebijakan tentang pengelolaan pesisir dan batas laut
• Seri Pengelolaan Wilayah Pesisir Regional, berisikan pengalaman, panduan, dan rujukan
Proyek Pesisir mengenai Perencanaan dan Pengelolaan Daerah Aliran Sungai (DAS), profil
atlas dan geografis pesisir Lampung, Balikpapan, Sulawesi Utara, dan Papua
8
University development was an important aspect of the CRMP, and the marine center at Bogor
Agricultural Institute, the premier natural resources management institution in Indonesia, was its
primary partner, and was used to develop capacity in other universities. In addition to managing
the Lampung site, the Center for Coastal and Marine Resources Studies established a national
ICM reference library that is open to students and professionals, and provides an inter-university
library loan service for other universities in Indonesia (Website: http://www.indomarine.or.id). The
Center initiated an annual ICM learning workshop, a national peered-reviewed coastal journal and
worked with the CRMP to establish a national coastal conference that is now the main venue for
exchange of information and case studies on ICM in Indonesia, drawing over 600 Indonesian and
international participants to its bi-annual meeting. Building from the positive experience with Bogor
and its marine center, an Indonesia-wide network of 11 universities (INCUNE) was developed that
tied together key coastal universities across the nation for information exchange, academic research and capacity development, with the Center for Coastal and Marine Resources Studies
serving as the secretariat. In addition to INCUNE, the CRMP was instrumental in developing the
new Indonesia Sea Partnership Program, modeled after the highly successful U.S. Sea Grant
College Program, that seeks to develop coastal outreach, education, policy and applied research
activities in key regional coastal universities. This program, sponsored by MMAF, connects regional universities with local governments and other stakeholders through issues that resonate
with local government and citizens, and addresses the gap of human and institutional capacity in
the regions.
National level efforts expanded to take advantage of new opportunities offered by new laws on
regional autonomy. From 2000 to 2003, the CRMP worked closely with the Ministry of Marine
Affairs and Fisheries, the National Development Planning Agency (BAPPENAS), other national
agencies, regional government partners, NGOs and universities to develop a new national coastal
management law. The National Parliament is now considering this law, developed through one of
the most participatory and transparent processes of law development in the history of Indonesia.
The draft law is incentive-based and focuses on encouraging local governments, NGOs and citizens to assume their full range of coastal management authority under decentralization on issues
of local and more-than-local significance. Other support was provided to the MMAF in developing
their own organization and staff, in strategic planning, and in creating new decentralized programs
such as the Sea Partnership Program.
The collection of CRMP materials and resources contained herein was produced to document and
make accessible to a broader audience the more recent and significant portion of the CRMP’s
considerable coastal management experience, and especially to facilitate its transfer to our Indonesian counterparts, colleagues and friends. The major product is Learning From the World of
Coastal Management in Indonesia , a CD-ROM that provides an overview of the CRMP (Proyek
Pesisir) and its major products. The collection is organized into five series related to general
themes. These are:
• Coastal Legal Reform Series, which includes the experience and guidance from the CRMP
regarding the development of community-based, district, provincial and national laws and policies on coastal management and on marine boundaries
• Regional Coastal Management Series, which includes the experience, guidance and references from the CRMP regarding watershed planning and management, and the geographical
and map profiles from Lampung, Balikpapan, North Sulawesi and Papua
9
• Seri Pengelolaan Wilayah Pesisir Berbasis Masyarakat, berisikan pengalaman dan panduan
Proyek Pesisir dan desa-desa percontohannya di Sulawesi Utara mengenai keberhasilan
kegiatan, serta proses pelibatan masyarakat dalam pengelolaan pesisir
• Seri Perguruan Tinggi, berisikan pengalaman, panduan, dan rujukan Proyek Pesisir dan
PKSPL-IPB mengenai peranan dan keberhasilan perguruan tinggi dalam pengelolaan pesisir
• Seri Pemantauan Pesisir, berisikan pengalaman, panduan, dan rujukan Proyek Pesisir
mengenai pemantauan sumberdaya pesisir oleh masyarakat dan pemangku kepentingan,
khususnya pengalaman dari Sulawesi Utara
Kelima seri ini berisikan berbagai Studi Kasus, Buku Panduan, Contoh-contoh, dan Katalog
dalam bentuk hardcopy dan softcopy (CD-ROM), tergantung isi setiap topik dan pengalaman dari
proyek. Material dari seri-seri ini ditampilkan dalam Bahasa Indonesia atau Bahasa Inggris.
Sedianya, sebagian besar dokumen akan tersedia baik dalam Bahasa Indonesia maupun Inggris.
Namun karena keterbatasan waktu, hingga saat koleksi ini dipublikasikan, belum semua dokumen
dapat ditampilkan dalam dua bahasa tersebut. Masing-masing dokumen dalam tiap seri berbeda,
tetapi fungsinya saling mendukung satu sama lain, yaitu:
• Studi Kasus, mendokumentasikan pengalaman Proyek Pesisir, dibuat secara kronologis pada
hampir semua kasus, dilengkapi dengan pembahasan dan komentar mengenai proses dan
alasan terjadinya berbagai hal yang dilakukan. Dokumen ini biasanya berisikan rekomendasirekomendasi umum dan pembelajaran, dan sebaiknya menjadi dokumen yang dibaca terlebih
dahulu pada tiap seri yang disebutkan di atas, agar pembaca memahami topik yang disampaikan.
• Panduan, memberikan panduan mengenai proses kegiatan kepada para praktisi yang akan
mereplikasi atau mengadopsi kegiatan-kegiatan yang berhasil dikembangkan Proyek Pesisir.
Mereka akan merujuk pada Studi Kasus dan Contoh-contoh, dan sebaiknya dibaca setelah
dokumen Studi Kasus atau Contoh-contoh.
• Contoh-contoh, berisikan pencetakan ulang atau sebuah kompilasi dari material-material terpilih
yang dihasilkan atau dikumpulkan oleh proyek untuk suatu daerah tematik tertentu. Dalam
dokumen ini terdapat pendahuluan ringkas dari setiap contoh-contoh yang ada serta sumber
berikut fungsi dan perannya dalam kelima seri yang ada. Dokumen ini terutama digunakan
sebagai rujukan bagi para praktisi, serta digunakan bersama-sama dengan dokumen Studi
Kasus dan Panduan, sehingga hendaknya dibaca setelah dokumen lainnya.
• Katalog, berisikan daftar atau data yang dihasilkan pada daerah tematik dan telah disertakan
ke dalam CD-ROM .
• CD-ROM, berisikan file elektronik dalam format aslinya, yang berfungsi mendukung dokumendokumen lainya seperti diuraikan di atas. Isi CD-ROM tersebut bervariasi tiap seri, dan ditentukan
oleh penyunting masing-masing seri, sesuai kebutuhan.
Beberapa dokumen dari Koleksi Dokumen Proyek Pesisir ini dapat diakses melalui internet di
situs Coastal Resources Center (http://www.crc.uri.edu), PKSPL-IPB (http://www.indomarine.or.id),
dan Proyek Pesisir (http://www.pesisir.or.id).
Pengantar ini tentunya belum memberikan gambaran detil mengenai seluruh kegiatan, pekerjaan,
dan produk-produk yang dihasilkan Proyek Pesisir selama tujuh tahun programnya. Karena itu,
kami mempersilakan pembaca untuk dapat lebih memahami seluruh komponen dari koleksi
dokumen ini, sembari berharap bahwa koleksi ini dapat bermanfaat bagi para manajer pesisir,
praktisi, ilmuwan, LSM, dan pihak-pihak terkait lainnya dalam meneruskan model-model dan
kerangka kerja yang telah dikembangkan oleh Proyek Pesisir dan mitra-mitranya. Kami amat
optimis mengenai masa depan pengelolaan pesisir di Indonesia, dan bangga atas kerja sama
yang baik yang telah terjalin dengan seluruh pihak selama program ini berlangsung. Kami juga
gembira dan bangga atas diterbitkannya Koleksi Dokumen Proyek Pesisir ini.
10
• Community-Based Coastal Resource Management Series, which includes the experience,
and guidance from the CRMP and its North Sulawesi villages regarding best practices and the
process for engaging communities in coastal stewardship
• Coastal University Series, which includes the experience, guidance and references from the
CRMP and the Center for Coastal and Marine Resources Studies regarding the role and accomplishments of universities in coastal management
• Coastal Monitoring Series, which includes the experience, guidance and references from the
CRMP regarding community and stakeholder monitoring of coastal resources, primarily from
the North Sulawesi experience
These five series contain various Case Studies, Guidebooks, Examples and Catalogues in
hard copy and in CD-ROM format, depending on the content of the topic and experience of the
project. They are reproduced in either the English or Indonesian language. Most of the materials in
this set will ultimately be available in both languages but cross-translation on some documents
was not complete at the time of publishing this set. The individual components serve different, but
complementary, functions:
• Case Studies document the CRMP experience, chronologically in most cases, with some discussion and comments on how or why things occurred as they did. They usually contain general recommendations or lessons learned, and should be read first in the series to orient the
reader to the topic.
• Guidebooks are “How-to” guidance for practitioners who wish to replicate or adapt the best
practices developed in the CRMP. They will refer to both the Case Studies and the Examples,
so should be read second or third in the series.
• Examples are either exact reprints of key documents, or a compilation of selected materials
produced by the project for the thematic area. There is a brief introduction before each example
as to its source and role in the series, but they serve primarily as a reference to the practitioner,
to be used with the Case Studies or Guidebooks, and so should be read second or third in the
series.
• Catalogues include either lists or data produced by the project in the thematic area and have
been included on the CD-ROMs.
• CD-ROMs include the electronic files in their original format that support many of the other
documents described above. The content of the CD-ROMs varies from series to series, and
was determined by the individual series editors as relevant.
Several of the documents produced in this collection of the CRMP experiences are also available
on the Internet at either the Coastal Resources Center website (http://www.crc.uri.edu), the Bogor
Agricultural Institute website (http://www.indomarine.or.id) and the Proyek Pesisir website (http://
www.pesisir.or.id).
This preface cannot include a detailed description of all activities, work, products and outcomes
that were achieved during the seven-year CRMP program and reflected in this collection. We
encourage you to become familiar with all the components of the collection, and sincerely hope it
proves to be useful to coastal managers, practitioners, scientists, NGOs and others engaged in
furthering the best practices and frameworks developed by the USAID/BAPPENAS CRMP and its
counterparts. We are optimistic about the future of coastal management in Indonesia, and have
been proud to work together during the CRMP, and in the creation of this collection of CRMP
(Proyek Pesisir) products.
11
Dalam kesempatan ini, kami ingin menyampaikan penghargaan yang setinggi-tingginya kepada seluruh
mitra di Indonesia, Amerika Serikat, dan negara-negara lainnya, yang telah memberikan dukungan,
komitmen, semangat, dan kerja keras mereka dalam membantu menyukseskan Proyek Pesisir dan
segenap kegiatannya selama 7 tahun terakhir. Tanpa partisipasi, keberanian untuk mencoba hal yang
baru, dan kemauan untuk bekerja bahu-membahu -baik dari pihak pemerintah, LSM, universitas,
masyarakat, dunia usaha, para ahli, dan lembaga donor-’keluarga besar’ pengelolaan pesisir Indonesia tentu tidak akan mencapai kemajuan pesat seperti yang ada sekarang ini.
Dr. Anne Patterson
Direktur
Kantor Pengelolaan Sumber Daya Alam
U.S. Agency for International Development/
Indonesia (USAID)
Maurice Knight
Chief of Party
Proyek Pesisir
Coastal Resources Center
University of Rhode Island
Dr. Widi A. Pratikto
Direktur Jenderal Pesisir dan Pulau-Pulau Kecil
Departemen Kelautan dan Perikanan
Republik Indonesia
Dr. Dedi M.M. Riyadi
Deputi Menteri Negara Perencanaan
Pembangunan Nasional/Kepala BAPPENAS
Bidang Sumberdaya Alam dan
Lingkungan Hidup
25 Agustus 2003
12
We would like to acknowledge and extend our deepest appreciation to all of our partners in Indonesia, the USA and other countries who have contributed their support, commitment, passion and
effort to the success of CRMP and its activities over the last seven years. Without your participation, courage to try something new, and willingness to work together –government, NGOs, universities, communities, private sector, experts and donors– the Indonesian coastal family could not
have grown so much stronger so quickly.
Dr. Anne Patterson
Director
Office of Natural Resources Management
U.S. Agency for International
Development/ Indonesia
Maurice Knight
Chief of Party
Indonesia Coastal Resources
Management Project
Coastal Resources Center
University of Rhode Island
Dr. Widi A. Pratikto
Director General for Coasts and
Small Island Affairs
Indonesia Ministry of Marine Affairs
and Fisheries
Dr. Dedi M.M. Riyadi
Deputy Minister/Deputy Chairman for
Natural Resources and Environment
Indonesia National Development
Planning Agency
August 25, 2003
13
DAFTAR KOLEKSI DOKUMEN PROYEK PESISIR 1997 - 2003
CONTENT OF CRMP COLLECTION 1997 - 2003
Yang tercetask tebal adalah dokumen yang tersedia sesuai bahasanya
Bold print indicates the language of the document
PEMBELAJARAN DARI PENGELOLAAN WILAYAH PESISIR DI INDONESIA
LEARNING FROM THE WORLD OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT IN INDONESIA
1. CD-ROM
CD-ROM
Latar Belakang Informasi dan Produk-produk Andalan Proyek Pesisir
Background Information and Principle Products of CRMP
SERI REFORMASI HUKUM
COASTAL LEGAL REFORM SERIES
1. Studi Kasus Penyusunan RUU Pengelolaan Wilayah Pesisir
Case Study Developing a National Law on Coastal Management
2. Studi Kasus Penyusunan Perda Minahasa Pengelolaan Sumberdaya WIlayah
Pesisir Terpadu Berbasis Masyarakat
Case Study Developing a District Law in Minahasa on Community-Based
Integrated Coastal Management
3. Studi Kasus Batas Wilayah Laut Provinsi Sumatera Selatan dan Provinsi BangkaBelitung
Case Study The Marine Boundary Between the Provinces of South Sumatera and
Bangka-Bilitung
4. Studi Kasus Konsultasi Publik dalam Penyusunan RUU
Case Study A Public Consultation Strategy for Developing National Laws
5. Panduan
Guidebook
6. Contoh
Example
7. Contoh
Example
8. CD-ROM
CD-ROM
9. CD-ROM
CD-ROM
14
Penentuan Batas Wilayah Laut Kewenangan Daerah Menurut
Undang-Undang No.22/1999
Establishing Marine Boundaries under Regional Authority Pursuant to
National Law No. 22/1999
Proses Penyusunan Peraturan Perundangan Pengelolaan
Sumberdaya Wilayah Pesisir
The Process of Developing Coastal Resource Management Laws
Dokumen-dokumen Pendukung dari Peraturan Perundangan
Pengelolaan WIlayah Pesisir
Example from Development of Coastal Management Laws
Dokumen-dokumen Pilihan dalam Peraturan Perundangan
Pengelolaan Wilayah Pesisir
Selected Documents from the Development of Coastal Management
Laws
Pengesahan Perda Minahasa Pengelolaan Sumberdaya Wilayah
Pesisir Terpadu Berbasis Masyarakat
Enactment of a District Law in Minahasa on Community-Based Integrated Coastal Management
SERI PENGELOLAAN WILAYAH PESISIR DAERAH
REGIONAL COASTAL MANAGEMENT SERIES
1. Panduan
Guidebook
Penyusunan Atlas Sumberdaya Wilayah Pesisir
Developing A Coastal Resources Atlas
2. Contoh
Example
Program Pengelolaan WIlayah Pesisir di Lampung
Lampung Coastal Management Program
3. Contoh
Rencana Strategis Pengelolaan Terpadu Teluk Balikpapan dan Petapeta Pilihan
Balikpapan Bay Integrated Management Strategic Plan and Volume
of Maps
Example
4. Contoh
Example
Atlas Sumberdaya Wilayah Pesisir Pilihan
Selected Compilation of Coastal Resources Atlases
5. CD-ROM
CD-ROM
Rencana Strategis Pengelolaan Terpadu Teluk Balikpapan
Balikpapan Bay Integrated Management Strategic Plan
6. Katalog
Catalogue
Database SIG dari Atlas Lampung (Edisi Terbatas, dengan 2 CD)
Lampung Atlas GIS Database (Limited Edition, with 2 CDs)
7. Katalog
Database SIG dari Atlas Minahasa, Manado dan Bitung (Edisi
Terbatas, dengan 2 CD)
Minahasa, Manado and Bintung Atlas GIS Database (with 2 CDs)
(Limited Edition, with 2 CDs)
Catalogue
8. Katalog
Catalogue
Database SIG dari Atlas Teluk Bintuni (Edisi Terbatas, dengan 2 CD)
Bintuni Bay Atlas GIS Database (Limited Edition,with 2 CDs)
9. Katalog
Catalogue
Database SIG dari Teluk Balikpapan (Edisi Terbatas, dengan 1CD)
Balikpapan Bay GIS Database (Limited Edition, with 1 CDs)
SERI PENGELOLAAN SUMBERDAYA WILAYAH PESISIR BERBASIS MASYARAKAT
COMMUNITY-BASED COASTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT SERIES
1. Studi Kasus Pengelolaan Sumberdaya Wilayah Pesisir Berbasis Masyarakat di
Sulawesi Utara
Case Study Community Based Coastal Resources Management in North Sulawesi
2. Panduan
Guidebook
Pengelolaan Sumberdaya Wilayah Pesisir Berbasis Masyarakat
Community Based Coastal Resources Management
3. Panduan
Pembentukan dan Pengelolaan Daerah Perlindungan Laut Berbasis
Masyarakat
Developing and Managing Community-Based Marine Sanctuaries
Guidebook
4. Panduan
Guidebook
Pembersihan Bintang Laut Berduri
Crown of Thorns Clean-Ups
5. Contoh
Dokumen dari Pengelolaan Sumberdaya Wilayah Pesisir Berbasis
Masyarakat di Sulawesi Utara
Documents from Community-Based Coastal Resources Management
in North Sulawesi
Example
6. CD-ROM
CD-ROM
Pengelolaan Sumberdaya Wilayah Pesisir Berbasis Masyarakat
Community-Based Coastal Resources Management
15
SERI PERGURUAN TINGGI KELAUTAN
COASTAL UNIVERSITY SERIES
1. Studi Kasus Pengembangan Program Kemitraan Bahari di Indonesia
Case Study Developing the Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
2. Contoh
Example
Pencapaian oleh Proyek Pesisir PKSPL-IPB dan INCUNE (1996-2003)
Proyek Pesisir’s Achievements in Bogor Agricultural Institute’s Center
for Coastal and Marine Resources Studies and the Indonesian Coastal
University Network (1996-2003)
3. Contoh
Kurikulum dan Agenda Pelatihan Pengelolaan Sumberdaya Wilayah
Pesisir Terpadu
Curriculum and Agenda from Integrated Coastal Resources
Management Training
Example
4. Katalog
Catalogue
Abstrak “Jurnal Pesisir dan Lautan” (1998-2003)
Abstracts from “Pesisir dan Lautan Journal” (1998-2003)
5. CD-ROM
CD ROM
Dokumen Perguruan Tinggi Kelautan
Coastal University Materials
SERI PEMANTAUAN WILAYAH PESISIR
COASTAL MONITORING SERIES
1. Studi Kasus Pengembangan Program Pemantauan Wilayah Pesisir oleh Para
Pemangku Kepentingan di Sulawesi Utara
Case Study Developing a Stakeholder-Operating Coastal Monitoring Program in
North Sulawesi
2. Panduan
Guidebook
Pemantauan Terumbu Karang dalam rangka Pengelolaan
Coral Reef Monitoring for Management (from Philippine Guidebook)
3. Panduan
Guidebook
Metode Pemantauan Wilayah Pesisir oleh FORPPELA, jilid 1
FORPPELA Coastal Monitoring Methods, Version 1
4. Panduan
Pemantaun Terumbu Karang Berbasis Masyarakat dengan Metode
Manta Tow
Community-Based Monitoring of Coral Reefs using the Manta Tow
Method
Guidebook
5. Contoh
Example
Program Pemantauan oleh Para Pemangku Kepentingan di Sulawesi
Utara Tahun Pertrama, Hasil-hasil FORPPELA 2002 (dengan 1 CD)
Year One of North Sulawesi’s Stakeholder-Operated Monitoring Program, FORPPELA 2002 Results (with 1 CD-ROM)
Untuk informasi lebih lanjut, silakan menghubungi:
For more information:
Coastal Resource Center
University of Rhode island
Narragansett, Rhode Island 02882, USA
Phone: 1 401 879 7224
Website: http//www.crc.uri.edu
16
CRMP
Ratu Plaza Building, lt 18
Jl. Jenderal Sudirman Kav. 9
Jakarta 10270, Indonesia
Phone: (021) 720 9596
Website: http//www.pesisir.or.id
Developing The Indonesian Sea
Partnership Program
(Program Kemitraan Bahari)
Stacey A. Tighe
Widi Pratikto
Maurice Knight
M. Zulficar Mochtar
Jason Patlis
Coastal University Series
CRMP Collection 1997-2003
i
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
(Program Kemitraan Bahari)
Stacey A. Tighe
Widi Pratikto
Maurice Knight
M. Zulficar Mochtar
Jason Patlis
Citation :Tighe, S.A., W. Pratikto, M. Knight, M.Z. Mochtar, J. Patlis, 2003; Developing
The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program; in CRMP Collection 1997-2003,
Coastal University Series, M.Knight, S. Tighe (editors); Coastal Resources Center,
University of Rhode Island, Narragansett, Rhode Island, USA.
ii
Contents
Preface
Acknowledgements
Abbreviations and Indonesian Terms
v
1
Introduction
1.1 Background
1.2 Marine Conservation
1.3 Small Islands
1.4 Governance
1.5 The U.S. Sea Grant College Program
1
1
2
2
3
5
2
Creating and Socializing a Partnership Concept
2.1 Inspiration for a Sea Grant-like Program in Indonesia
2.2 Study Tour on Coastal Law to USA in 2000
2.3 The Coastal Zone Conference in the USA in July 2001
2.4 The Draft National Law and Sea Grant (Jan 2002)
2.5 A Champion for Indonesia's "Sea Grant" (June 2002)
2.6 Socializing the Concept during Legal Consultations
2.7 Study Tour to USA for the State's Perspective (Oct-Nov 2002)
2.8 An Invitation to the U.S. Sea Grant (Business) Meeting (Apr 2003)
2.9 Participation in Coastal Zone '03 Conference in USA (July 2003)
3. Designing the Sea Partnership Program
3.1 General Objectives and Principles
3.2 The National Sea Partnership Office
3.3 The National Themes or Priorities for Year 1
3.4 The Types of Activities Funded
3.5 The Regional Centers
3.6 Criteria for the Proposals from the Regions
3.7 Propsed Activities from the Regional Centers
9
9
10
11
12
13
13
14
18
19
21
21
22
24
25
30
34
35
iii
4. Funding Sources
4.1 Finding Partners
4.2 The Funding Process
37
37
39
5. The National Workshops
5.1 Workshop #1, October 2002: The Launch
5.2 Workshop #2, May 2003: Regional Programs
5.3 Workshop #3, September 2003: Implementation Issues
41
43
45
6. Discussion
6.1 Status of Year One (2003)
6.2 Plans of Year Two (2004)
6.3 Additional Comparasions Between the U.S. and Indonesian Programs
6.4 Chronology of the Sea Partnership Program, 1999-2003
6.5 Recomendations
48
48
51
52
53
References
56
Figure 1: The Organizational Structure of the Sea Partnership Program
Figure 2: Current Theme Areas for the U.S. Sea Grant Program
Figure 3: University Based Regional Implementation Structure
Figure 4: Sources and Allocation of Budget for Sea Partnership Program in Indonesia
Figure 5: Partnership Analysis: Sea Grant Workshop #3
57
58
59
60
61
iv
Preface
G
overnments, non-government organizations, the private sector, and indeed, a
nation’s citizens, look to universities as the natural source for intellectual guidance and expertise, but primarily in terms of a source of well-trained people.
There are other reasons that universities are and should be a source for more
than just training, however. When there is a new paradigm, such as integrated coastal resources management, universities are the first to have the information to teach, to apply the
new concept to the local context trying to ascertain its relevance and local variations, but it
takes some effort and time for a critical mass of awareness, learning and understanding to
build before a change in policies or behaviors can occur.
Even when there is no new advancement in technical knowledge, universities can play a
major role in helping a country adapt to new political situations. Universities can supply two,
less obvious or expected services: the role of analytical and critical thinkers helping develop
options and understand the implications of the new circumstances, and the role of mentoring and building capacity in a broad range of stakeholders (i.e., not just university students)
for adapting to the new circumstances. For these reasons, the University of Rhode Island
and the Coastal Resources Center sought to partner with universities in Indonesia from the
onset of their program, seeing universities to be critical components of success in bringing
and sustaining coastal change in Indonesia.
In accordance with mission of the Coastal Resources Management Project (CRMP or Proyek
Pesisir as it is known in Indonesia), to support Government of Indonesia (GoI) in implementing decentralized and strengthened coastal resources planning and management, the CRMP
partnership with the Center for Coastal Resources Management Studies at the Bogor Agricultural Institute (CCRMS) become an important program that has significantly contributed
to the achievement of the CRMP mission both in the national and local levels, especially in
Lampung province of South Sumatra.
At the national level, the CRMP-CCRMS program assisted Government of Indonesia (GoI)
in disseminating concepts and practices on integrated coastal resources management using various mechanisms for dissemination, as well as to present the review and analysis of
application of these new concepts tot eh Indonesian context. One of the more significant
efforts was creation of the bi-annual National Conference on Indonesia’s Marine and Coastal
Resource Management, first implemented and hosted by the CRMP-CCRMS program in
1998. The 2nd National Conference in 2000 was co-hosted through partnerships with variety of stakeholders in Makassar, South Sulawesi, and the most recent was the 3rd National
v
Conference in Bali in 2002, mentored by the CRMP-CCRMS partners, but implemented by
local institutions.
Implementation of the three conferences had gained extensive support and participation (the
Third National Conference has more than 600 participants in attendance) from stakeholders
indicating an enormous interest and enthusiasm of the Indonesian community in coastal management, and an increased understanding of its importance. The next National Conference
will be held in East Kalimantan in 2004 and will be totally funded by local stakeholders. This
bi-annual National Conference has become an excellent event to exchange experiences,
research results, and other current development concerning coastal and marine resource
management.
In addition to the National Conferences, the CRMP-CCRMS program also held numerous
workshops and training programs around the country on Integrated Coastal Management to
improve stakeholders’ understanding and knowledge, and to disseminate and share information about applied coastal management in Indonesia such as annual learning workshops on
the progress of the CRMP program. The CRMP-CCRMS established a “learning team” at
the Center to critically review and provide feedback to the implementing field programs in
Lampung, East Kalimantan, North Sulawesi and the National program.
This team produced, each year with more significant contributions from the field program
staff themselves as their capacity rose, an annual report and workshop to compile, review
and present the findings and progress of the CRMP program. Each year, the theme was
focused on progressive phases of the generic policy cycle, consisting of Awareness Building, Creating Management Plans, Adopting Plans and Policies, Implementing Plans and the
Monitoring & Evaluating of plans for adaptation.
Another successful mechanism developed by the CRMP-CCRMS program was the development and implementation of a quarterly professional coastal and marine technical journal
and newsletter: (Jurnal and Warta Pesisir dan Lautan disseminated widely to more than
1000 stakeholders with a growing demand from a larger audience. These publications are
now fully implemented and sustained without project assistance, through the CCMRS and
the Bogor Agricultural Institute. In addition, the CRMP and the CCRMS have established a
national reference library for marine and coastal management in Bogor, which has become
a prominent source for stakeholders to get information about coastal management.
In the context of institutional strengthening for coastal management, the CRMP-CCRMS
partnership initiated the development of a cooperation network among universities focused on
coastal and marine issues, known as the Indonesian Coastal University Network (INCUNE).
INCUNE was established in 1999 and currently has a total of 11 university members each of
which has its own smaller network of universities on coastal and marine resource matters.
Through the establishment of this network, information exchange among the universities has
been initiated, and then disseminated to other local stakeholders.
In the last year of the program, several of the INCUNE members shared experiences and
participated with CCRMS in the delivery of joint ICM Training program for local stakehold-
vi
ers, adapting the curriculum to include local context and content as another mechanism for
building the capacity of the universities to provide services to their communities. There has
been significant interest in expanding this network to include more universities and to include
more shared services and programs, all of which is under discussions at present.
On-the-ground experience was developed at the CCRMS by assisting the CRMP Lampung
field program that was working with the community and local government of Lampung province to develop their provincial and local coastal management programs. The major output
from the CRMP Lampung program was the Lampung Atlas and Strategic Plan of Coastal
Resource Management at the provincial level, both developed through a broad participatory
process. To demonstrate the implementation of early actions from the strategic plan, CCRMS
worked with two local communities in Lampung to create a marine sanctuary program at
Sebesi Island and an environmentally friendly mangrove management program in Pematang Pasir village. Both of these programs, and other work in Lampung, is now supported
and mentored directly through the CCRMS and local government, without the support or
assistance of the CRMP.
In the final two years of the CRMP, significant support was provided to the Ministry of marine
Affairs and Fisheries to develop a decentralized partnership program with regional coastal
universities to provide awareness, education & training, policy and applied research support
to local stakeholders in order to address issues of local concern that match with national
priorities.
This effort, the Indonesian Sea Partnership Program, is modeled after the U.S. Sea Grant
College Program, but has been adapted for the Indonesian context, and has begun its first
year of implementation. This program is using in a dynamic approach of designing the program “by doing” in order to get maximum, pragmatic operational input from the implementers and regions who are responsible for contributing matching funds to the Sea Partnership
contributions.
Through the variety of mechanisms described above, the CRMP and its university partners
have significantly contributed to strengthening of Indonesia’s coastal resources management capacity, both at national and local levels. Developing and applying the skills of critical thinking in a learning approach, building the capacity of local stakeholders (in addition
to creating educated college graduates) and mentoring or advising local coastal programs
are all becoming standard roles for the coastal universities in Indonesian, and through the
Sea Partnership, INCUNE, KONAS and other programs, hopefully these activities can be
expanded and sustained indefinitely for the benefit of implementing sustainable coastal
resources management in Indonesia.
This Coastal University series contains (bold type indicates the language of the document):
Studi Kasus Pengembangan Program Kemitraan Bahari di Indonesia
Case Study Developing the Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
vii
Contoh
Example
Pencapaian oleh Proyek Pesisir PKSPL-IPB dan INCUNE (1996-2003)
Proyek Pesisir’s Achievements in Bogor Agricultural Institute’s Center for
Coastal and Marine Resources Studies and the Indonesian Coastal
Univesity Network (1997-2003)
Contoh
Curriculum dan Agenda Pelatihan Pengelolaan Sumberdaya Pesisir
Terpadu
Curriculum and Agenda from Integrated Coastal Resources Management
Training
Example
Katalog
Catalogue
Abstrak “Jurnal Pesisir dan Lautan” (1998-2003)
Abstracts from “Pesisir dan Lautan Journal” (1998-2003)
CD-ROM
CD ROM
Dokumen Perguruan Tinggi Kelautan
Coastal University Materials
These documents should be read in conjunction with one another, and contain cross-references to each other. In particular, the CD of Selected Documents contains many of the supporting documents that were developed or used by CRMP and its counterparts. The materials
in this series represent not only successful (or early) models for coastal management in a
decentralized Indonesia, but also models for management of other natural resources, in other
governance systems, and in other countries. The issues discussed and the challenges faced
in these efforts apply in many other contexts and it is hoped that their availability in this set
will maximize their value.
•••
I
n 2002 the Indonesian Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries’ Directorate General of
Coasts and Small Islands launched the Sea Partnership Program (SPP or Program
Kemitraan Bahari), a unique university-based “science for the coasts” program that
provides national funds to regional universities in order to conduct local coastal programs co-funded by, developed and implemented collaboratively with local governmental
and non-governmental partners. The National Sea Partnership Program co-funds joint
activities between the five strongest regional marine universities and their respective local
governments, the private sector and other interested parties to address local coastal needs
in extension (outreach and adult training), education (K-12), policy and applied research.
Marine conservation activities have been proposed in each of the regional proposals for the
program’s first operational year (2003). Partnerships with international conservation NGOs,
donor projects and individual organizations in conducting local activities are all possible under
the Sea Partnership Program. The concept and format for this program is loosely modeled
after the U.S. Sea Grant College Program. The geopolitical situation of Indonesia makes it
an ideal candidate for a Sea Grant-like program that has been adapted to the Indonesian
context. However it was the juxtaposition of several factors that led to the development and
implementation of such a program at this time.
The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program is still in its first full year of implementation as this
viii
is being written, and as such is a little premature for a traditional presentation as a Case
Study. However, because the U.S. Sea Grant model being used is so mature and this program has developed so quickly, it seemed reasonable to try and capture its original design
and implementation now, both as a historical context for Indonesia, and as a reference for
several other provinces within Indonesia that have expressed an interest in joining the Sea
Partnership Program as it expands, as well as for other countries that are looking at the U.S.
Sea Grant Program as a possible model for their use and adaptation.
This case study presents the Indonesian geopolitical context and rationale for creating a
national university-based coastal advisory program. It includes a brief description of the U.S.
Sea Grant College Program model, and a chronological history of the resulting Sea Partnership Program’s creation, design and first year.
Stacey A. Tighe
Widi Pratikto
Maurice Knight
M. Zulficar Mochtar
Jason Patlis
ix
Acknowledgements
W
henever something “new” is created, or even adapted from some existing
model, there are usually many, many influences, large and small, that have
some impact on the design or implementation of the “new” outcome. So is
the case with the Indonesian Sea Partnership Program. More than one of
the co-authors and even other people have been overheard mentioning at some time that
this was their idea or initiative. Yet in almost each case, some document or recalled event
from an even earlier period was found that indicated that someone else, previously, had also
discussed or envisioned such a program. None of these people were mis-speaking about
their original role in the program - all of them and more had some role in the creation and
start-up of this initiative. Rather, it just shows that this program is a good idea that has been
desired, in one form or another, for some time. Good ideas come and go, that is the nature
of creativity and missed opportunities. However, due to wonderful circumstances, and yes,
to the right ideas at the right time in the right forum from people who had the capacity and
resources to act, this Sea Partnership concept and its many proponents met in various ways
during the critical period of 2000-2002, and this initiative was born. Everyone who has been
involved, formally or informally, can honestly claim to some extent, that this is “their” idea or
initiative. In our perspective, it only adds strength to its advocates and hope for its continued
future and expansion.
The authors would like to thank the large number of individuals and organizations that have
collaborated with the CRMP over the seven years of its duration that culminated in the production of this document. Their collaboration has contributed in both direct and indirect ways
to the materials and the concepts in this Case Study.
However, there are a few people and institutions that the authors would like to thank in particular for their roles in helping to create this program, and the Case Study you hold in your
hands that documents, however briefly, the early days of this Sea Partnership Program.
Special recognition goes to Lynne Hale and Brian Crawford of the Coastal Resources Center
(CRC) of the University of Rhode Island for their support of CRMP’s university development
activities in Indonesia, and their whole-hearted support and commitment to the CRMP over
the life of the project. Steve Olsen, the Director of CRC also has his “fingerprints” on the Sea
Partnership Program through his work outside Indonesia on how the U.S. Sea Grant model
could be replicated or adapted in other countries. Dr. Anne Patterson, Director of the Office of
Natural Resources Management at the United States Agency for International Development’s
Jakarta Mission, through which CRMP was funded, has been a staunch advocate and source
of support for this initiative from its conception.
x
The role of coastal universities in developing coastal management capacity in a country is
often held to the side of other program activities. Thanks to the design of the CRMP, led in
part by the then Professor at the Bogor Agricultural Institute, and now Minister of Marine
Affairs and Fisheries Rohkmin Dahuri, coastal universities were given a more central and
interactive role in the CRMP. In both of his roles as a member of the design team for the
project, and his ultimate role as Minister, Dr. Dahuri has been a leader for Indonesia in building
practical capacity at the coastal universities, and getting them engaged in coastal management policy and practice. The authors and all of the beneficiaries of his vision and support
owe Minister Rohkmin Dahuri a great debt of gratitude and appreciation. Special thanks
goes to Dr. Bengen, an advisor to the CRMP and Director of Bogor Agricultural Institute’s
Center for Coastal and Marine Resources Management (IPB-CCRMS), for his dedication,
commitment and constant efforts to link the coastal universities to people and institutions
related to coastal management in Indonesia and globally. With the vision and direction of Dr.
Dietriech Bengen, CRMP and CCRMS created a network of coastal universities for sharing
information and experiences: the Indonesian Coastal Universities Network (INCUNE) that
is still growing in capacity and in size. Indeed, this network is one of the seeds of the Sea
Partnership Program.
This Sea Partnership Program was developed “on the heels of” the Draft National Law for
Coastal Management developed by DKP lead by Dr. Sudirman Saad, Dr. Sapta Putra Ginting, and others, supported by the CRMP, particularly in the public consultations that were
held through out Indonesia and the inclusion of a passage in the Draft Law that establishes
and codifies a Sea Partnership Program. At many of these public consultations, thanks to
the CRMP Legal Team and Dr. Widi Pratitko (co-author and Director General of Coasts and
Small Islands in the Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries), special efforts were made to
gather university stakeholders together to discuss and develop the Sea Partnership Program. The contributions of all these participants and the hosts of these gatherings are due
our thanks and appreciation.
Initiatives are not created by magic, or solely through the hard work of the visionaries and
leaders, but also through the huge efforts of the technical and administrative staff that support these leaders. In the case of the Sea Partnership Program, the authors would like to
thank the many, many staff of the CRMP and of the Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries Directorate General of Coasts and Small Islands who created technical presentations,
promoted the program through newsletters and conversations, handled logistical arrangements for meetings and publications and many other services. The authors wish to thank,
in particular, all of the Directors of the Directorate-General of Coasts and Small Islands, as
well as Dr. Sapta Ginting, Eko Rudianto, Ali Supardan and Ida Kusuma of the Ministry of
Marine Affairs, and Niken Amalia, Glaudy Hendrarsa, Wilson Siahaan and Lissa Ingkiriwang
of the CRMP Jakarta office.
We would also like to thank all of the regional center coordinators: Dr. Alex Masengi and
Pankie Pengemanan (North Sulawesi), Dr. Akbar Tahir and Dr. Jamaluddin Jompa (South
Sulawesi), Dr. Syafei Sidik and Dr. M. Zainuri (East Kalimantan), Dr. James Hellyward and
Dr. Hafrijal Syandri (West Sumatera), Dr. Daniel M. Rosyid and Dr. Mukhtasor (East Java),
and Andi Rusandi (DKP P3K). In addtion we would to thank the centre university partner
xi
who provided thier time and advice to DKP; these include: Dr. Daniel Monintja (IPB), Dr. Fedi
Sondita (IPB), Dr. Hamzah Latif (ITB), Dr. Ary Purbayanto (IPB), Dr. Safwan Hadi (ITB), Dr.
Kamiso (UGM), and Dr. Abimanyu (UI). All of these university partners serve without fee during Year 1 of the Sea Partnership Program and we appriciate thier time and commitment.
Whenever a model is adapted or replicated, the mentors and practioners of the original model
contribute greatly, often with their own time and funds, to the designers of the new model.
This has definitely been the case in the Indonesia Sea Partnership Program and the authors
owe the thanks and appreciation to everyone in the U.S. Sea Grant College Program and
NOAA who have hosted or helped us in any way. This includes special thanks to the folks in
the Washington, DC offices of NOAA who have given us nothing but good advice, unending
materials and support with their time and own programmatic activities. This includes Ron
Baird, Director of the National Sea Grant Office and Jim Murray (Program Director of Sea
Grant Extension), Bud Ehler and Leah Bunce from the National Ocean Service International
Office. Additional thanks and special appreciation goes to Rene Eppi (Director of OAR’s
Office of International Activities) and Matt Wilburn and Jill Hepp who provide him (and us)
with excellent support for their incredible enthusiasm, support, advocacy and efforts to help
the Indonesian program in every way. Particularly, thank you for inviting an Indonesian delegation to the Sea Grant Week in the USA as a learning opportunity on the “nuts and bolts”
of a federal-state university-based partnership. A very different appreciation and thanks is
due to the folks in the state Sea Grant programs of Hawaii (Peter Rappa, Clyde Tamura,
Gordon Grau), of Cornell (Dale Baker), of Rhode Island (Barry Costa-Pierce) and most of
all, North Carolina (Ron Hodson, Steve Rebach, Katie Mosher, Walter Clark, Barry Nash,
Lundy Spence, Tammy Sumner). Each of you and all of you have helped to give Sea Grant
xii
Abbreviations and
Indonesian Terms
CCMRS
CRC
COREMAP
CRMP
DKP
EEZ
GoI
ICM
INCUNE
IPB
ITB
Kabupaten
KONAS
Kota
MMAF
MPA
MREP
NOAA
NGO
P3K
Proyek Pesisir
SPP
UI
UNSRAT
: Center for Coastal and Marine Resources Studies at the Bogor
Agricultural Institute
: Coastal Resource Center, University of Rhode Island
: Coral Reef Habilitation and Management Project
: Coastal Resources Management Project (Proyek Pesisir)
: Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries (Departmen Kelautan
dan Perikanan)
: Exclusive Economic Zone
: Government of Indonesia
: Integrated Coastal Management
: Indonesian Coastal University Network
: Bogor Agricultural Institute (Institut Pertanian Bogor)
: Bandung Institute of Technology (Institut Teknologi Bandung)
: District
: National Coastal Conference (KOnferensi NASional)
: Municipality
: Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries (Departmen Kelautan
dan Perikanan)
: Marine Protected Area
: Maine Resources Evaluation Project
: U.S. National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration
: Non-governmental Organization
: Director General of Coasts and Small Islands (DG Pesisir dan
Pulau-Pulau Kecil) in DKP
: Coastal Resources Management Project in Indonesia
: Sea Partnership Program (Program Kemitraan Bahari)
: University of Indonesia
: University of Sam Ratulangi, Manado, North Sulawesi
xiii
AH/Docs/TaskMon/Oct03
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
1
Introduction
1.1 Background
I
ndonesia is the world largest archipelago with 81,000 km of coastline (the second
largest only after Canada). More than 75% of the national area, a total of almost 6
million square kilometers is marine, defining Indonesia as owner of the world’s third
largest Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). These waters may host more than 17,000
islands (they are presently being recounted under the United Nations definitions) that stretch
across 3 time zones in the equatorial Pacific between Asia and Oceania. Indonesia borders
the EEZ or territorial boundaries of 10 nations, making it a central player in most regional
marine initiatives.
As any other nation on the globe, since its independence in 1945 the Indonesian nation has
been striving to be a developed nation characterized by prosperity, justice, peace and democracy. One of the most fundamental challenges facing Indonesia today in achieving such
a noble goal is to maintain economic development on a sustainable basis. Coastal and marine resources are recognized as being of increasingly strategic significance in the process
of Indonesia’s sustainable economic development. However, the level of coastal and marine
degradation is alarming. With the fourth largest population in the world1, much of which has
been displaced from degraded uplands, pressure on coastal resources is escalating daily. It
has been estimated that between 60% and 95% of Indonesia’s population lives within 100
km of the coast (World Resources Institute, 2001)2. Of the Indonesian population living in the
coastal area it is estimated that 80% engage in marine resource-dependent activities such as
fishing, mariculture (World Wide Fund for Nature, 1994) and/or related activities. Even more
fundamental is that fish products on average contribute two-thirds of animal-based protein
consumption in Indonesia, and not just in the coastal areas (Intercoast, 2001 ). Despite a high
degree of biodiversity, according to recent global studies less than 7% of the coral reefs are
in “excellent” condition. (Wilkinson, 2000) and it has been estimated that Indonesia is losing
one species a day (Jakarta Post, 21 May 03).
The timing of the development of a Sea Partnership Program matches an increase in awareness of the importance of coastal and marine resources to life in Indonesia. A recent national
survey revealed that over 80% of respondents believe that marine and coastal resources
1
2
Approximately 230 million people, most of whom are below the age of 28
This number is based on 1995 United Nations Population Division Totals
1
Developing The Indonesian Partnership Program
are important to the future of the nation and 90% rated marine resources as an “important”
source of food for their families (USAID Coastal Resources Management Project, 2000).
1.2 Marine Conservation
Indonesia’s genetic richness on both land and in the sea, while considerably threatened, still
harbors the richest biodiversity in the world, comparable only to its geomorphic and cultural
diversity. The nation falls within two major global genetic ecoregions (Asia and Australia,
separated by the Wallace Line), and includes the smaller eco-regions of the Sulu-Sulawesi
Seas, the Banda-Flores Seas and the Bismarck-Solomon Sea eco-region. With over 8.5
million hectares (51,020 km2) of coral reef, Indonesia has more reef area than any other
nation in the world (~18% of the world’s reef area; UNEP-WCMC, 2001). Over two-thirds of
the world’s hard coral species (~80 genera, approximately 600 species) are found in Indonesia (Veron, 2000). Additionally, approximately 50% of the world’s coral reef fish species
are found in Indonesia (at least 2057 species from 113 families), 97 of them endemic to
Indonesia (Allen and Aldrim, in press). New species are described every year, ranging from
pygmy seahorses (Lourie and Randall, 2003) to the Indonesian coelacanth (Erdmann et al,
1998). Indonesia has phenomenal cetacean diversity as well. There are at least 30 species
of cetaceans found in Indonesia, more than one-third of the known species of whales and
dolphins worldwide (Kahn, 2002). Cetacean habitats include the rivers, mangroves and
coastal areas, as well as the open oceans. The deep inter-island channels are considered
to be of major importance for large migratory marine life and straddling fish stocks (Kahn,
2002). Indonesia is the only equatorial country worldwide where tropical Indo-Pacific oceanic
exchange of marine life occurs.
These factors define Indonesia, globally, as one of the “last greatest natural places” for tropical marine ecosystems and a critical global “biodiversity reserve”.
Yet, at present, only slightly over 1% of Indonesia’s marine area is included in Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) (~5million hectares out of a total of 360 million hectares; (Djohani,
1989; Department of Forestry, 2003). A major challenge, therefore, in achieving the goals
of prosperity, justice, peace and democracy in a rapidly evolving political setting has been
making conservation – as a means of sustaining resources – an acknowledged development priority. To change the present momentum of exploitation and degradation to one of
conservation and sustainable use (through/by means of marine protection activities around
all 81,000 kilometers of coastline) will require enormous, sustained efforts by local populations, as well as support and assistance by conservation specialists.
1.3 Small Islands
As an archipelagic state, Indonesia is defined by its islands, both large and small. It is on
the natural resources of these islands that Indonesia is basing a major component of its development strategy. However, the diversity and the remoteness of many of the islands pose
2
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
both classic and unique coastal management challenges.
Economic development on small islands is constrained by small local markets, a narrow
resource base, high unit costs of infrastructure, a heavy dependence on external trade,
and vulnerability to external and natural disasters. Other adverse factors include the high
transportation costs, a remoteness that limits fiber optics and other telecommunications
connections, and the insular culture of many island communities. In addition, large marine
areas around small islands can lead to nefarious activities such as dumping of hazardous
waste, piracy, etc.
In the search for development, small islands have few options but to seek export opportunities (and efficient import substitutes) in order to drive domestic economic activity. Yet with
applied research and/or transfer of existing knowledge and technology, small islands have
great potential for economic development. Agriculture, fisheries, tourism and small-scale
manufacture appear to hold the most promise in terms of future development opportunities.
Successful examples of economic development on small islands include squash (vegetable)
exports from Tonga, tourism and textiles in Fiji, automotive wire assembly in Western Samoa
and tuna fishing in the Solomon Islands. However, even these industries rely on a fragile,
vulnerable natural resource base. Environment also plays a major role. Over-exploitation
and pollution are problems in most Pacific islands; there is a lack of space and capacity for
waste disposal and the availability of clean water is problematic.
Given the factors of remoteness, vulnerability, limited human or natural resources, and biogeographic, cultural and administrative diversity extant in Indonesia's small island, various
solutions developed at the local levels will more likely succeed than a single global solution
prescribed by the national government. However, success is apt to require some expertise
that can facilitate the local solution in the larger context, and that can help to import or adapt
models or technologies from outside.
1.4 Governance
Indonesia is becoming remarkably more stable politically, despite numerous potential triggers
over the last few years, change is calmly moving forward. In 1999 the government passed
radical and sweeping laws to decentralize government management authority.3 While the legal
framework continues to evolve and some initial problems remain to be addressed, these laws
were largely implemented by 2001 in a calm and successful process that transferred new
levels of management authority and financial resources to the regions for local governance
(Knight and Lowry, 2003) and which transfer in power after a presidential impeachment in
2001 did not distrupt. Even after the dramatic terrorist incidents in America on September
11, 2001 and in Bali, Indonesia, in October of 2002, controversial conflicts in Afghanistan
and Iraq, the reduction of national subsidies for gas and electricity, and continued economic
3
Particularly important were Law 22/1999 on Regional Autonomy and Law 25/1999 on Regional Fiscal Balance
3
Developing The Indonesian Partnership Program
impact from the SARs epidemic, Indonesia consistently produced a measured and calm
response.
Since the policy to develop the marine sector was declared in the national development
strategy in 1993, there has been an increased coastal and marine focus in several organizations, primarily the central agencies. The regional and local governments are still focused
on local level projects from prior programs based on their limited jurisdiction at that time. For
example, past loan and donor projects like the Marine Resources Evaluation Project (MREP),
the CoraI Reef Rehabilitation Project (COREMAP) Phase 1, COFISH (under Asian Development Bank) and the Coastal Resources Management Project (CRMP or Proyek Pesisir)
focused primarily on site-specific activities that were linked at the national level through loose
networks. These major programs have successfully completed 3-6 year coastal pilot projects
in such areas as community-based coastal resources management, creation of coastal and
marine resource profiles and atlases, management plans and strategies at the community,
district, provincial and national levels.
Models and good practices derived from these pilots and earlier projects are now the basis for
replication through long-term programs in the Indonesia through new donor and internationally
supported conservation programs. These new activities include large coral reef conservation
and management projects in about one third of the provinces, and a establishing capacitybuilding projects with regional-scale management activities in several others.
With the implementation of Law 22/99 in 2001 and the beginning of an era of regional autonomy, local governments haves clearly been given the authority to manage their coastal
and marine resources and their small islands. However the capacity of local governments to
manage these resources is still limited, especially in regard to non-fisheries-related coastal
issues. In addition, since there was little sense of stewardship in the centrally managed era,
with even less attention to sustainability of resource management practices, user conflicts due
to growth in the coastal population, poaching by intruders, and related destructive practices
went unnoticed/uncurbed. The regional and local governments need help to address these
new challenges with their new authority.
The economic situation in Indonesia has stabilized and is now posting an estimated 3-4%
annual growth rate. In recognition of its ongoing political and economic stability, Indonesia’s
international credit rating was recently raised and the Rupiah has remained steady or advanced on the US Dollar for 11 straight months. Still, the Rupiah is far from its pre-crisis
levels and the national economy continues to struggle under the weight of difficult domestic
and international debt finance challenges. While the economy is growing, the nation is still
not able to allocate the resources necessary for meeting the challenges of expanding marine
biodiversity conservation that will lead to sustainable management of marine and coastal
resources and sustained national and regional economic growth.
Despite these probelms, the Indonesian government is administratively better structured
and more willing to address marine conservation issues than ever before. In 1999, concurrent with the decree of Law 22/99 the new Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries (MMAF)
was established with a mandate to manage both resource maximization and conservation
4
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
in a decentralized manner. The creation of the MMAF raised coastal and marine issues to a
cabinet level position and through this position many issues are being brought to the service
for attention that were previously left behind.
One of the most significant results of this new level of visibility has been the development
of the proposed National Act on the Management of Coasts and Small Islands. This new
national legislation was developed in a transparent and highly participative process and
will be presented to the National Parliament for consideration in late 2003 or early 2004. In
addition, under the new decentralization laws, in 2002 a total of 15 provincial coastal management strategic plans were developed and the process for creating 15 provincial local
coastal management laws was initiated. In 2003 another 16 coastal management laws are
expected at the district level. These efforts are paving the way for other initiatives and opening the door for further legal reform in coastal and marine resources management. Unlike in
the past, when laws were both created and implemented by the central government, these
new draft laws support management of coastal and marine resources by the coastal communities closest to these resources.
Moreover, as a new Ministry, the MMAF was able to respond to these new developments more
easily than in other ministries where restructuring for decentralization often met resistance
from entrenched power hierarchies. After a settling-in period, MMAF is now implementing
national-level programs through decentralized mechanisms. One example of this is the newly
established Sea Partnership Program (SPP) described in this Case Study. Throughout the
30 provinces, local government offices supported by the MMAF are building their capacity
to handle new management responsibilities and also present opportunities for cooperative
initiatives with donors and international conservations organizations.
Indonesia is a country that is looking more and more to its coastal and marine resources
for the economic and social development of the nation. The size and extent and status of
Indonesia's coastal resources illustrate the urgent need for coastal management programs
that integrate governmental and non-governmental activities. The need to build local capacity not only in government but also in communities and the private sector, and the need
to develop new solutions cries for assistance from the institutions of higher education and
research such as the stronger regional universities. The degree of reliance of communities
on their dwindling coastal resources makes apparent the potential benefit of results-oriented
and university-based “science for the coasts” programs to the basic quality of life for coastal
residents. The probable economic contribution to local, regional and national economies from
the development and sustained implementation of an Indonesia Sea Partnership Program
alone make this initiative worthwhile. More than most other countries, Indonesia needs good
information and science-based management on its coasts.
1.5 The U.S. Sea Grant College Program
The U.S. Sea Grant College Program is a federal program of approximately $100 million per
year managed by the U.S. National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
that provides non-advocacy, results-oriented and university-based “science for the coasts”
5
Developing The Indonesian Partnership Program
to states through cost-sharing activities that address their local coastal management needs.
The 30 U.S. coastal states included in the programs operate under an Association with the
following purposes:
• To further the understanding, use and conservation of marine and coastal resources
(including those of the Great Lakes); and to encourage increased accomplishments and
initiatives in related areas;
• To increase the effectiveness of member institutions in their work on marine and coastal
resources and environmental issues;
• To enhance the mutual capabilities and stimulate cooperation and unity of effort among
members; and
• To provide a forum for discussing programmatic issues and facilitating communication
among members and with agencies, industry, and other interested parties.
The recently updated vision of the U.S. Sea Grant Association (2000) is reported below and
is shared, in concept, by the designers of the Indonesian Sea Partnership Program.
• Sea Grant will become NOAA’s primary university-based research, education, training,
and technical assistance program in support of coastal resource use, management and
conservation.
• Sea Grant will play a strong leadership role in helping the nation address such critical
issues as protecting water quality and coastal habitat, responding to coastal hazards,
ensuring seafood safety, and developing coastal economies and communities.
• Sea Grant will provide a strong federal/state/local network that integrates research, outreach
and technical assistance to generate practical solutions to real problems and strengthen
the nation’s over-all capacity to deal with coastal problems.
The National Sea Grant Program Office in NOAA supports an Advisory Council that defines
national priorities and a program strategic plan. The National Office also reviews and approves the states’ proposals for research and extension programs, manages the distribution
of grants to the states, conducts regular monitoring and evaluation of the program, serves
as a home for the network of Sea Grant Colleges4 and as a liaison for Sea Grant to other
national and international organizations.
The United States has 30 designated local Sea Grant college programs with generally one
Sea Grant Program designated per state. However, Massachusetts and California each have
two universities designated, the state of South Carolina has a consortium of 8 universities,
and Mississippi and Alabama share one program with a consortium of 8 universities. There
are specific criteria that must be met for an institution to be designated a member of the
Sea Grant College Program (there are also other designations such as a participating Sea
Grant institution or an area program). Of the 30 programs, there are approximately 26 different administrative and local organizational structures, demonstrating the flexibility of the
program to accommodate diverse local situations.
4
6
The program is called The Sea Grant College Program. However, members of the program are both colleges
and universities. In this case study, we will use the term "university" to refer to member institutions.
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
State-level Sea Grant College Programs develop programmatic activities that are funded
through an annual budget allocation from the national government that is determined by
formula. The amount of this funding base, or core funds, is highly transparent and how it is
calculated is well known. Hence, all institutions are aware of how the national funds are allocated across states with varying lengths of coastline and coastal population levels. National
program funds must be matched on a 2 to 1 basis ($2 federal for every $1 state) but some
states choose to exceed the minimal ratio, and in some instances, private sector groups
also contribute funds. In addition to the core funds that each Sea Grant College Program
receives from the national government, there are special supplemental funds that are competed for nationally among all Sea Grant institutions on certain priority topics established at
the national level. These are called Strategic Priority Initiatives.
The 30 State Sea Grant Colleges each manages and implements a university-based program
with other local colleges and universities, non-federal government agencies, the private sector and other local interested parties in its area to conduct coastal outreach, extension and
education activities deemed to be of state or regional importance but that also contribute to
national priorities. Each Sea Grant College university has a long-term program based on 2and 4- year funded proposals and is guided by a State Advisory Board and various Advisory
Committees for individual issues or themes (mariculture, education, etc.). These long-term
stable programs in the best universities can help identify and address issues as they come
up (“reactive”), can more easily design activities that suit local situations and can more easily
solicit co-funding from local government and others.
U.S. Sea Grant projects are identified through a two-phased review process: a pre-proposal
and a full proposal review. Research projects (approximately 50% of program funds) and
extension programs go through an annual or biannual “request for pre-proposals” (RFP)
process. Extension activities must be tied to research activities and vice versa to build an
integrated and self-supporting system. Each state program conducts a preliminary review
by an advisory panel consisting of external peer experts, of all proposal submissions. After
a first round of reviews, those submitting winning pre-proposals are requested to submit a
full proposal, which then goes through another round of peer review. In this second round,
one member of the pre-proposal review panel sits on the full proposal review panel. Importantly, reviewers are external and not from the local area. Once the state program proposal,
which includes research, extension and education activities, as well as organizational and
administrative support, is agreed upon locally, this “omnibus” proposal is sent to the national
NOAA Sea Grant Office for approval and funding. A similar process is used at the national
level for national strategic initiatives, which are competed for on a nation-wide basis and are
awarded by the national office. Once a state's Omnibus Proposal has been approved and
funded by the national office, the state Sea Grant College Program makes awards separately
and directly to each of the approved projects or research leaders identified in the Omnibus
Proposal, and follows through with administration and monitoring of the activities and with
regular reports to the National Sea Grant Office.
For Indonesia, the strengths of the U.S. Sea Grant College model include its flexibility to
accommodate local administrative structures, its ability to assist local needs while address-
7
Developing The Indonesian Partnership Program
ing national priorities, its decentralized design, its cost-sharing mandate guaranteeing local
activities are of local importance, its university-base that insulates the program somewhat
from local politics, and its range of funded activities (applied research, extension to users
based upon the research, environmental education).
8
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
2
Creating a Sea Partnership Concept
2.1 Inspiration for a Sea Grant-like Program in Indonesia
M
any different steps were involved in initiating a Sea Grant-like program in
Indonesia. Some of these steps were facilitated by the Coastal Resources
Management Project (CRMP or Proyek Pesisir) and supported by the USAID
program. Others were initiated and sponsored by the Ministry of Marine Affairs and in particular, the Directorate General of Coasts and Small Islands (DKP-P3K) with
inputs from consultations with universities around the nation. Still others were facilitated and
assisted by the U.S. Sea Grant College Program or other NOAA offices and state Sea Grant
Programs. In addition, other programs from Australia, Korea and Japan that have similarities
to Sea Grant inspired other steps. As with many creative processes, it is not clear when the
exact moment of creation was reached in this new initiative. In many ways, it grew slowly,
organically. As each conversation or presentation or learning activity was completed, there
was more and more a sense that this could and should be a great program for Indonesia, and
that this was the right group and time to initiate it. At some point along the way, the program
pilot became inevitable, as did many of the design components that either replicate or differ
from the original models.
A series of first hand visits to Sea Grant activities and offices in the U.S. were key in developing the tangible face of a university-federal partnership coastal program. Once it became
clear that a sea partnership program should be developed, every opportunity was taken by
MMAF to include Sea Grant presentations to different stakeholders during visits with different primary agendas. These exchanges have been invaluable in developing a vision for
the Indonesia program, and in extracting lessons from the United States experience that
informed the adaptation of the Sea Grant program to the Indonesia context. However willing
people or institutions are to start a program, it takes a catalyst or trigger to make it happen.
A champion is needed who has the visibility and resources to make things happen. Below is
a chronological description of the activities that introduced different Indonesian stakeholders to the U.S. Sea Grant model and of the evolution of the decision to initiate a pilot sea
partnership program in Indonesia. Some of these events or processes had overlaps in time
and people, but each had a role in building the resolve to create the Indonesian program.
9
Developing The Indonesian Partnership Program
2.2 Study Tour on Coastal Law to USA in 2000
In 1999 the Indonesian government created a new Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries.
That action coincided with the adoption of Indonesian Law 22 that effectively de-centralized authorities and budgets to the regions. The new Ministry had a wonderful opportunity
to begin with a clean slate, and develop decentralized programs from the start, without the
bureaucratic history and reluctance to give power “away” to the regions.
In order to support the new Ministry, CRMP began a national policy program in 2000. As part
of that program, a study tour to the USA for governmental leaders in Indonesia was planned
and implemented to provide a first-hand perspective of the U.S. Coastal Zone Management
Act and other marine and coastal programs (Knight, 2001). The study tour was developed
and facilitated by Maurice Knight, and included several leaders from the new Ministry of
Marine Affairs and Fisheries (Minister Sarwono Kusuma, Dr. Rokhmin Dahuri (then Director
General of Coasts and Small Islands), and others), as well as representatives from regional
governmental agencies (J. Saruan, North Sulawesi and others). This tour presented several
examples of, and generated numerous enlightened discussions on, decentralized coastal
management, integrated coastal management and other related issues.
The tour included an introduction to and several discussions about the U.S. Sea Grant
College Program and its possible application or adaptation to Indonesia. Meetings with the
National Sea Grant Office staff in Washington, DC as well as with Rhode Island State Sea
Grant Program staff illustrated both national and state levels of administration and benefits of
the program, and indicated the types of possible partnerships that governments, local communities and the universities could develop. The Indonesian team was clearly impressed,
and saw the immediate benefits of such a program for Indonesia, particularly as it focused
on local solutions, economic development of the marine sector, science-based information
for the public and thrived in a decentralized context. This last factor was particularly relevant
under the new decentralized authorities created by Law 22.
One additional aspect of the Sea Grant College Program presented to the Indonesians was
its basis in a national law that created a foundation and gave semi-permanent nature to the
program, providing stability despite the changes of political parties and administrations in the
White House. It was a clear demonstration of the Sea Grant Program’s value to the regions
as the team was told, repeatedly, of several attempts over the 30 years of the Sea Grant’s
life to cut the program at the national level, only to have the state representatives fight in the
budget negotiations to save it because it brought such benefits to their local constituents.
In any case, the Indonesian team returned with a positive feeling about the potential of a
sea partnership program, and eventually was able to provide more support for it as their
positions changed. Minister Sarwono left the government and became an advisor to many
government counterparts and NGOs, as well as to the CRMP and therefore continued his
support for developing an Indonesian program. Dr. Rokhmin Dahuri became Minister of
Marine Affairs and Fisheries and led his agency in its efforts to use their resources to create a pilot Sea Partnership Program. Mr. J. Saruan has retired from the government in
North Sulawesi, but has joined the USAID Coastal Resources Management Project II that
10
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
is starting in September 2003 as an advisor. He has already lent his support to work with
the North Sulawesi university selected as a pilot site for the new Sea Partnership Program
now underway. All in all, this first study tour had a significant impact in laying the foundation
for creating a Sea Partnership Program in Indonesia through receptive and knowledgeable
government counterparts.
2.3 The Coastal Zone Conference in the USA in July 2001
Every two years in the USA the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) hosts a national coastal management conference. This conference showcases the
various NOAA programs and serves as a technical meeting for state and national coastal
management agencies, as well as academics. It frequently attracts sizeable international
participation, and for Coastal Zone 2001, the CRMP sponsored the participation of the Rector (President) of the Bogor Agricultural Institute (IPB), Dr. Aman Wiranatakusamah and Dr.
Dietriech Bengen, Director of IPB’s Center for Coastal and Marine Resources Studies, the
foremost coastal management institution in Indonesia. In addition to their participation in the
week-long coastal conference, Drs. Wiranatakusamah and Bengen visited Rhode Island and,
facilitated by Dr. Stacey Tighe (newly appointed CRMP Senior Technical Advisor) met with
state coastal managers, university leaders and marine faculty, staff/members of the Coastal
Resources Center and Coastal Institute, and of the State Sea Grant College Program. One
of the main objectives of this visit was to demonstrate the various roles that universities can
play in integrated coastal management, and to discuss their applications to the Indonesian
context.
During the Rhode Island visit, the national and state Sea Grant models received a lot of
attention from the Indonesian team. They were very interested in the role of Sea Grant in
providing students and faculty with applied research funding for their theses, in the very
local problem-solving outcomes of the projects, and in the value of the extension and education components to the public and to coastal users. There were good discussions about
how to relate this program to the already launched INCUNE (Indonesia Coastal University
Network) research network and how to fund it. Their recommendations from the visit include
adding a section to the Draft National Coastal Management Law (presently in development
in Indonesia by the Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries) that would create a Sea Grantlike partnership program (in the United States, the Coastal Zone Management Act and the
National Sea Grant College and Program Act are separate pieces of legislature) in order to
assure a funded mandate.
Visits to the NOAA Sea Grant College Program booth and with other coastal managers and
scientists at the Coastal Zone Conference further educated the Indonesian team on the various components and potential of the U.S. model for Indonesia. Both scientists/educators
returned with a foundation to support a new initiative and with the vision of how it might be
implemented. Dr. Aman created an International Program at IPB that included a student program in preparation for possible joint research activities, with a first thought for mariculture
projects, that might be conducted under parallel or partnered Sea Partnership programs
between the USA and Indonesia. (Rhode Island Sea Grant had expressed a willingness to
11
partner with IPB on future selected activities). Dr. Bengen continued to strengthen INCUNE
members through faculty training and other opportunities, and led a program to build their
capacity to teach (outreach) ICM to local counterparts at several of the INCUNE campuses
and that encouraged their engagement in local coastal management initiatives. In 2003 Dr.
Bengen took a leave of absence from CCMRS to serve as Deputy to the Coastal Resources
Management Project II and is now mentoring some of the pilot university members of the
new Sea Partnership Program.
2.4 The Draft National Law and Sea Grant (Jan 2002)
As mentioned previously, under its national policy activity, the CRMP worked with the Ministry
of Marine Affairs and Fisheries to assist them in developing a Draft National Coastal Management Law. This included bringing on-board Jason Patlis, a recent Fulbright Scholar who
had been working in Indonesia on natural resource legal issues, to assist with preparing the
background and justification (Academic Study) for the national coastal law, and afterwards,
to support the drafting process lead by MMAF. Mr. Patlis’s previous experience in the USA
brought two specific elements to Indonesia that led to the inclusion of an educational outreach
program in the Academic Study and the inclusion of a Sea Grant-like program in the early
(Jan 2002) drafts of the law. First, he had worked in the General Counsel’s Office of NOAA,
home agency of the U.S. Sea Grant College Program. Second, he had worked in the office
of Rhode Island Senator John Chafee. It was Chafee’s Rhode Island colleague, Senator
Claiborne Pell who first introduced the legislation in 1966 to create a U.S. Sea Grant College
Program; Rhode Island legislators had long been leaders in creating coastal management
legislature and initiatives.
Although the Sea Grant concept was presented to and favored by Indonesian participants
from early study tours (Dr. Rokhmin Dahuri in 2000, Dr. Aman in 2001, etc.), in the recollection of the authors, there was no overlap in the discussions regarding the inclusion of a
Sea Grant passage in the law, nor an overlap of reading the reports and recommendations
from the various groups. This independent coincidence in support of national legislation to
codify an initiative by Mr. Patlis and others merely demonstrates first, that this was an idea
and model whose time had come, and second, that even by early 2001 there was enough
awareness and appreciation of the Sea Grant model for it to be included in the Draft National
Law without major debate.
This intersection of the Draft National Law and the Indonesian Sea Grant-like program
interests also explains, in part, how the program was initiated in the Ministry’s Directorate
General of Coasts and Small Islands, rather than higher up in the Ministry for use by all the
various departments. It was the operational department of the ministry dealing with coastal
management (Directorate General of Coasts and Small Islands) that was developing the
Draft National Coastal Management Law, and therefore it was in this department that the
discussions were held about the need of such a partnership program.
These circumstances set the stage for the words and the concept of a university-federal
government partnership, however simply defined, to be included in the Ministry’s draft coastal
management law and coastal department. However it might have remained, even to this day
and years from now, as simply a concept on paper if not for the emergence of an advocate
and visionary leader for the Sea Partnership initiative.
2.5 A Champion for Indonesia s “Sea Grant” (June 2002)
As in any new agency, it takes time for a leader to settle in and sort through the start-up
and jurisdictional issues and priorities, including staff. The Directorate General of Coasts
and Small Islands, now the home of the Draft National Coastal Management Law and the
Sea Grant concept, began under the enlightened leadership on Dr. Rokhmin Dahuri until his
advancement to the role of Minister in mid-2001. For a year, the position he left was empty,
or filled for a few months by another scientist, who was transferred to another division more
suitable to his background and talents. In June of 2002 a new Director General, Dr. Widi
Pratikto, was appointed to lead the Coasts and Small Islands Division. Coincidentally, Dr.
Pratikto had completed his Ph.D. work in Coastal Engineering at the University of North
Carolina with part of his research funded through the North Carolina Sea Grant Program.
As a result of his experiences in the North Carolina, Dr. Pratikto was familiar with U.S. Sea
Grant program, and for the last decade he had been trying with limited success to develop
some facsimile of the Sea Grant Program in his home institution in Surabaya. Shortly after assuming the leadership of the Directorate General for Coast and Small Island Affairs
and recognizing the early elements of a Sea Grant-like program in his division, Dr. Pratikto
wasted no time in developing the concept more fully and getting seed money approved for
a first year pilot of the Indonesia Sea Partnership Program. The Sea Partnership Program
was formally launched in October 2002 (4 months after his arrival at the Ministry) and was
funded for the Indonesian Fiscal Year 2003 (January to December 2003). In all of his efforts, Dr. Pratikto was fully supported by the Minister for Marine Affairs and Fisheries, Dr.
Rokhmin Dahuri, who was the leading Indonesian academic in coastal management prior
to his appointment as Minister.
2.6 Socializing the Concept during Legal Consultations (2002)
The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program was developed on the heels of the Draft National
Coastal Management Law process. With the justification that the Sea Partnership was to be
established by the Coastal Management Law, and that stakeholders would recognize the
benefits to the public of a co-funded partnership, the Sea Partnership concept was introduced and highlighted at almost every venue where the Draft National Law was presented
to groups or individuals for consultation. During most of 2002 and into 2003, the CRMP and
the Ministry conducted an extensive consultative and socialization process for the Draft
National Law through more than ten national and regional public consultations across the
country in an open and participatory manner, gaining praise for its transparency and technical quality. The Sea Partnership Program benefited from this consultative process due to
the Law Program’s high profile (it was often led by Dr. Pratikto or one of his Directors and
attended by local Governors, Mayors, legislators as well as a broad range of governmental
and non-governmental coastal stakeholders) and its budget.
Developing The Indonesian Partnership Program
However, even with the inclusion of the Sea Partnership Program in the consultation process,
it did not become an imminent activity until Dr. Pratikto arrived. In the first consultations, often
there were at most a couple of PowerPoint slides or a comment about the Sea Partnership
Program presented. The CRMP and Ministry teams felt that the design and implementation
of a Sea Partnership Program would have to wait until the Law was passed and funding
became available. With Dr. Pratikto on board at the Ministry, there was, in addition to a
greater emphasis on the potential and importance of such a program to the nation and the
local communities, a separate gathering convened at each consultation, often over dinner or
late into the evenings. The CRMP and Ministry teams invited the leading academicians and
politicians to more detailed briefings about the need and value of a university-governmental
coastal partnership, and asked for feedback and guidance in its design and implementation.
One example of the feedback concerned the name of the program; many academics felt that
the Indonesian concept of a “grant” was weaker than the concept of "shared funding and
collaboration in problem-solving" described in the partnership program. Therefore Indonesia
has chosen not to adopt the “Sea Grant” name, and has dubbed this the Sea Partnership
Program (Program Kemitriaan Bahari) to emphasize the commitment required of participants
in the program.
This series of public consultations with the academic sector also served to help identify those
locations and university partners most likely to succeed in developing and implementing
a new and innovative initiative. Indeed, it was an informal assessment conducted by the
Ministry of the sincerity, capacity and relationships among local counterparts during these
consultations that led to the short list of universities and regions chosen to serve in the pilot
Sea Partnership trials.
The exposure and open promotion of the Sea Partnership concept in this condensed and
intensive manner helped build the momentum needed to convince the funding sources and
other counterparts that they should support and participate in the development of the partnership program, with or without it’s codification in the draft National Law. Despite the joking
remarks from the legal team that Sea Grant no longer needs the National Law, most of the
people and organizations engaged in the pilot activities, as well as the U.S. advisors from
numerous Sea Grant offices, continue to emphasize the great importance of incorporating
the Sea Grant progam into law to guarantee its sustainability and stability.
2.7 Study Tour to USA for the State s Perspective (Oct-Nov 2002)
Indonesian Parliament was to pass the National Coastal Management Law (a unique-to-Indonesia, incentive-based, decentralized law), and support the budget for a Sea Partnership
Program, CRMP and the Ministry felt that the members of the Marine Sub-Committee of the
National Parliament’s Environment Committee first needed to better understand the draft
the Law, Sea Grant models, and their potential benefits. So in late October-early November 2002, a small study-tour for five people to the USA was proposed, with a focus on the
state’s perspective on the structure and implementation of a national coastal management
law (CZMA), and on the national U.S. Sea Grant College Program.
14
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
The original plan was to have two members of Parliament and Dr. Widi Pratiko and a SubDirector from his staff in the Coasts and Small Islands Division who was handling aspects of
both the National Coastal Management Law and the Sea Partnership Program travel shortly
after the launch of the Sea Partnership Program in October 2002. Unfortunately, the Sea
Partnership Workshop (see below) occurred a few days after the tragic bombing in Bali, and
the increased security after this event delayed the processing of travel visas for two of the
team to the USA indefinitely. Therefore a much smaller group of three, one member of the
National Parliament’s Environment Committee (Dr. Soestrisno Sosroprajitno) and Dr. Pratikto,
with Dr. Stacey Tighe of the CRMP as escort and facilitator, departed for the USA.
The team traveled for almost three weeks, to Hawaii (offering a remote island perspective as
well as excellent academic ties to Indonesia), North Carolina (Dr. Pratikto’s alma mata, with a
very strong Sea Grant Program and a base of Indonesian students on campus), Rhode Island
(home of the CRMP and a Sea Grant leader), and Washington, DC, to visit the national offices of NOAA. Fortunately, Dr. Soestrisno had conducted his PhD at the University of Hawaii
in agricultural economics and served as an extension agent in the Ministry of Agriculture in
Indonesia for much of his pre-Parliament career. Once introduced to the Sea Grant model,
Dr. Soestrino immediately grasped the benefits of the program; he recognized the differences
from the way extension is usually conducted in Indonesia, and became an instant advocate
for the university-government partnership concept and pilot program.
In Hawaii, in a few short days, the team met with Jeremy Harris, Mayor of Honolulu (a Marine
Biologist and a former Sea Grant Extension Officer), with Brian Shatz, a State Representative who served on the Environment Committee and also had Sea Grant experience, with
several administrative offices in regards to the Coastal Management Law, and with the Sea
Grant office. In addition to an excellent presentation on the breadth and operation of the
State Sea Grant Program and loads of reading materials for the team, Dr. Clyde Tamura and
Peter Rappa of Sea Grant took the team to two field sites of Sea Grant activity that were
fabulous examples of the partnerships that can be created under Sea Grant and that could
be envisioned as being replicated fairly easily in Indonesia.
At the first side, Dr. Clyde Tamura showed the team one of his projects, a backyard mariculture
experiment and training site. He had worked previously with university faculty in Indonesia
and was excited about the possibility of further work together. The land for his project was
loaned by a community college (a soccer field they no longer used). A supplier donated
the mariculture (tax write off and a marketing tool). Fishermen contributed the hatchlings.
Student interns handled most of the daily chores at the site. A research/teaching professor
ran several experiments to vary the conditions of the mariculture experience, wrote up the
analysis and trained small groups of people how to set-up their own backyard system to grow
marketable products. All of this was used to improve and support very small-scale, often
family-run enterprises in Hawaii relating to mariculture. It was a simple step for the team to
see this kind of an activity working in Indonesia, and Dr. Tamura and the team discussed
how the Indonesian and U.S. Sea Partnership Programs might someday work collaboratively
on parallel activities with cross visits. One of Dr. Tamura’s talents as an Extension Officer
is creating activities like this with very little leveraged funding from Sea Grant, supporting a
high volume of applied research and extension on a limited budget.
15
Developing The Indonesian Partnership Program
At the second side, Mr. Peter Rappa showed the team the program for Hanauma Bay, a small
(eight hectare) beach in an eroded volcanic crater that is spectacular to look at and has very
easy access from the major urban area of Honolulu. Hanauma Bay is a joint program between
the city/county and Hawaii Sea Grant, and operates as a heavily managed and extremely
popular marine protected area (city park) and beach. Sea Grant primarily runs the education
and outreach program there that began as a table under the shade of a tree offering environmental and safety information to the park’s visitors. A few years ago the reef and beach
were being “loved to death” by as many as 10,000 visitors each day, so Sea Grant and the
city/county worked together to study and implement management alternatives to protect this
valuable reef for the tourists that are a foundation of the Hawaiian economy. Carrying capacity
and economic studies had been conducted resulting in a tiered fee structure (for residents
and visitors) that limit the daily visitors to 2000 people, and vastly improved their experience
with carefully managed concessions for food and beach services (snorkeling gear, etc), and in
short order, the biodiversity richness of the reef. The core of the Sea Grant impact is seen in
the new and vibrant information center and programs (classrooms and materials and trained
educators and special events) for the public, including the creation of a mandatory seven
minute film that educates visitors to the environmental and safety rules of the park, required
once per year for every visitor. Presently the city/county manages the park services and the
Sea Grant program staffs and manages the education and outreach program (now including
a pretty shaded hut providing quality information and help to visitors from a corps of trained
volunteers). Eventually the city/country or a private sector or non-government organization
will take over the education and outreach components of the Hanauma Bay program. The
team was impressed with several aspects of the Sea Grant and city/county park program,
but in particular three elements that would be valuable to Indonesia. First, as a city/county
marine park, it serves as an excellent model of how to manage at that scale since Indonesia
has only six national marine parks and a few community fishing reserves, but now through
decentralization will be looking to create such locally managed conservation and recreation
areas. Second, how a university-based program could provide the expertise in analyzing
and implementing the options for managing the marine park with the city and public input
(lots of very vocal public input!) to arrive at a solution that has pleased almost everyone
beyond their expectations. Third, how the partnerships generated the money for the education elements, including the large, successful use of community volunteers to conduct the
outreach. The team and Mr. Rappa discussed much possible future collaboration between
the two nation’s Sea Partnership Programs from informal “shadowing” of the park and Sea
Grant staff by Indonesians to teach them approaches and skills to structured training weeks
for Indonesian Extension Officers and outreach specialists.
These two experiences provided tangible, visible examples of Sea Grant at work in a collaborative, co-funded operation that was clearly valued by all participants. It also provided
the teams with concrete, feasible next steps for possible Indonesian-American partnerships
through university- government- public partnerships that could help build needed capacity in
Indonesia at the local and national levels for applied research, creating partnerships, problemsolving, public education, outreach and how to manage such a Sea Partnership program.
Next the team visited the North Carolina Sea Grant Program, led by Dr. Ron Hodson.
Through the extraordinary generosity and hospitality of that group, the team met with every
16
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
counterpart the team could imagine to hear his/her point of view and experience on local
implementation of the Coastal Zone Management Law (the program helped to develop state
policies and programs on managing natural hazards such as hurricanes, fisheries, coastal
zoning, etc.), (for full description see North Carolina Coastal Management Newsletter at http:
//dcm2.enr.state.nc.us/CAMAgram/Winter03/visitors.htm) and on the Sea Grant Program
(for full article in North Carolina Sea Grant COAST WATCH Newsletter see www.ncsu.edu/
seagrant/coastwatch/Indonesia.htm). The North Carolina program links several universities in a consortium using a very different structure than the Hawaiian program. The team
met their wide-ranging staff of Extension Specialists, including the Legal Specialist (Walter
Clark) who facilitates both the development of new policies with stakeholders and also the
dissemination and application of new regulations to users. The team met the Sea Food Specialist (Barry Nash) who works with small seafood producers to find ways to increase shelf
life and market value of their products, and even had the opportunity to work with the team
of homemakers who help develop and test new, healthier ways to prepare seafood, that is
communicated to the public through an annual cookbook and other extension programs.
The role of the Communication Specialist, Katie Mosher, cannot be underestimated as she
single-handedly (it appeared) and effectively made connections with every stakeholder and
interest group who might have interest in the work and outputs of the Sea Grant research
and outreach programs. Her impact and the message from Russ Lea, Vice President for
Research for the North Carolina system (“The universities are where the action is. There’s a
rapid transfer of knowledge through the extension program to the stakeholders - right as the
scientific breakthroughs are being generated”) led the Indonesian Sea Partnership designers
to include the principle of communications in the design of their program. One last element
of the superb exposure to the North Carolina program came by way of students. There is a
small but strong and consistent population of Indonesian students at NCSU, and the Indonesian team met with them to discuss student possibilities in a U.S. - Indonesian exchange
or program. All of these conversations and introductions created early bonds between two
good programs, and the hope for more specific collaboration soon.
The team’s visit to Washington, DC and NOAA was brief but very effective. Team members
met with three of NOAA’s international offices (Leah Bunce, National Ocean Service (NOS);
Ron Baird, Director of Sea Grant, and Rene Eppi of Ocean & Atmospheric Research (OAR)).
Due to the team’s now solid understanding of the Sea Grant basics, after general discussions, the members jumped directly to next steps of possible collaboration between the two
countries and agencies (NOAA and the Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries). These
included broad support that NOAA/National would give to the state programs that worked
with Indonesia, and some technical advisory assistance from NOAA in mentoring Indonesia
during its development and strategic planning of its Sea Partnership Program. In addition,
the team met with the Indonesian Ambassador to the United States to describe the partnerships and models of coastal management that were in progress.
One possible joint activity included NOAA’s interest in facilitating the development of a South
East Asian Regional Sea Grant Program and how Indonesia might be able to assist and
participate. Indonesia has expressed interest in contributing to a regional Sea Partnership
Forum but as yet has limited resources and capacity to do so. An important component that
cannot be accomplished solely through Indonesian domestic efforts like the Sea Partnership
17
Developing The Indonesian Partnership Program
program is the development of mechanisms for addressing issues of more than national
significance. The seas that surround Indonesia also surround the Philippines, Malaysia,
Thailand, Singapore, Vietnam and other South East Asia regional nations. Many of the marine
resources in these waters are highly migratory and require regional approaches for effective
and successful management. This is especially important for the sustainable management
and availability of regional coastal habitats for spawning and nurseries that can be protected
and managed through regional networks of locally established marine protected areas but
includes international approaches for management of large marine ecosystems. Mechanisms
for regional sharing of information on these issues are desperately needed. The Minister of
Marine Affairs and Fisheries has made making Indonesia a leader for marine and coastal
resources management in the South East Asia region one of his top priorities and Indonesia
stands ready to participate in any regional initiatives, including continuing work with NOAA’s
Sea Grant and OAR International Offices.
Armed with this encouragement and, in receipt of an invitation to join NOAA’s Sea Grant
Week (a “business” meeting on the operation of the state programs attended by most or all
programs), the team left for Rhode Island.
In Rhode Island, the primary objective was participation in a workshop compiling “lessons
learned” from the international field programs of the CRMP (1997-2003) from Indonesia,
Tanzania, Kenya and Mexico. However, there were multiple meetings with Barry CostaPierce, Rhode Island Sea Grant Director, and his staff. Barry has also worked extensively
in Indonesia in the past, and his remarks regarding how to adapt the Sea Grant model for
Indonesia were quite well founded. Coincidently, the team joined Dr. Costa-Pierce at an
aquaculture conference to discuss university-government-public partnerships with NOAA
representatives and two researchers from Canada who work with an aquaculture research
network that was considering expansion and also looking at the Sea Grant model. These
conversations led to further meetings for Dr. Widi when he traveled briefly to Dalhousie University in Canada (Minister Rokhmin Dahuri’s alma mata for his PhD) for meetings with the
faculty there regarding potential linkages with the Canadian university and the Indonesian
Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries.
In general, this study tour, the places, institutions, examples and people encountered were
a significant source of inspiration for the Indonesian program. Having just publicly committed to initiating a Sea Partnership pilot for 2003, Dr. Widi was very focused on the design
considerations for his own program and was very engaged and open to recommendations
and ideas.
2.8 An Invitation to the U.S. Sea Grant (Business) Meeting (April 2003)
In April 2003, another small team left Indonesia to attend the Sea Grant Week of internal business meetings held biannually by NOAA, this year hosted by the Texas Sea Grant Program.
Small delegations from three other countries that had already received some U.S. assistance
and experience in Sea Grant (Korea, Nicaragua, Honduras) were also invited to attend for
discussions on internationalizing the Sea Grant program and possible adaptations of the
18
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
model in other places. The Indonesian participants included Dr. Widi Pratikto, his delegated
Sea Partnership Coordinator Ms. Ida Kusuma, and Dr. Stacey Tighe of the CRMP.
This was a fairly intimate set of “nuts and bolts” administrative and strategic planning meetings for the various state Sea Grant Programs and between the state and national programs,
attended by a total of approximately 200 people. For Dr. Pratikto and Dr. Tighe, this meeting felt like a reunion of now warm friends and colleagues from the Hawaii, North Carolina,
Rhode Island and Washington Sea Grant offices. There were few presentations, except a
couple from the national program office reviewing the results of a recent Sea Grant Program
Assessment and some new strategic initiatives. The rest of the week was consumed with
meetings of the various specialists. Although the team roamed through the meetings freely
(mostly) as observers, Dr. Pratikto primarily attended the meetings of the Sea Grant state
directors and the outreach specialists, Dr. Tighe attended the meetings of the Asst Directors
(heads of the state research programs) and the legal specialists, and Ms. Kusuma attended
the meetings of the treasurers and the communication specialists. The balance of their time
was spent informally meeting one-on-one to discuss or ask questions, and with Rene Eppi of
the NOAA OAR International Affairs Office (who dedicated his full week to attend this meeting, particularly for discussions on a South East Asia Regional Sea Grant Initiative).
This Sea Grant Week experience was so informative and productive for the Indonesian team
that hosting such an activity at least annually was included in the Indonesian Sea Partnership Program design as a result.
2.9 Participation in Coastal Zone '03 Conference in USA (July 2003)
In the final weeks of the CRMP, a last study tour to the USA for an Indonesian coastal management team was conducted to enable team members to attend NOAA’s Coastal Zone ‘03
Conference in Baltimore, Maryland in July 2003. Dr. Pratikto was an invited and sponsored
speaker/guest of NOAA’s National Ocean Service for the International Session; he was accompanied by his Deputy, Mr. Ali Supardan (Manager of he Sea Partnership Program) and Dr.
Sapta Ginting, a sub-director in the Coastal Management Directorate who had been unable
to join the Hawaii-North Carolina trip in 2002. Dr. Ginting has management responsibilities in
the Ministry’s national coastal law development activity, the Sea Partnership activity and in a
Asian Development Bank and World Bank coral reef rehabilitation and management project
(COREMAP, Phase 2) that is considering supporting an outreach and extension component
in their project. Two other prominent Indonesians from the Ministry of National Development
Planning (BAPPENAS) were supported by the CRMP to attend so that they could become
more familiar with the issues of integrated coastal management, coastal governance and
marine protected areas. Dr. Dedi Riyadi, Head of Natural Resources, and his associate,
Ms. Wahyuningsih Darajati (“Ning”), Director of Marine and Fisheries will be responsible for
the integration and coordination of the coastal programs between the various agencies and
sectors in Indonesia, including the National Coastal Management Law, marine protected
areas and the Sea Partnership Program. Dr. Stacey Tighe and Mr. Maurice Knight of CRMP
escorted the team to the conference.
19
Developing The Indonesian Partnership Program
The team managed to conduct a fair amount of business at the Conference and during
the trip. In addition to attending an international 3-day workshop to prepare a policy paper
for the World Parks Congress (held in September 2003 in South Africa), and attending the
Conference (or making presentations in the case of Drs. Pratikto and Ginting), the team also
renewed the acquaintances of Sea Grant and coastal management professionals from Hawaii, North Carolina, Rhode Island and Washington, DC, and introduced the new expanded
team to the Sea Grant staff. A series of informal side meetings with the NOAA international
office of Rene Eppi moved into plans to work together on specific activities. Mr. Eppi and his
associate, Dr. James Murray, Director of Extension for the National Sea Grant Office were
invited to attend the Third Indonesian Sea Partnership Workshop scheduled for September
2003 as observers and as advisors to the five pilot Regional Centers and the Ministry’s Sea
Partnership teams. In particular, the NOAA team would mentor and serve as Advisor to the
Indonesian team in the areas of strategic planning for the Regional Centers and to expand
the understanding of what coastal outreach and extension can accomplish and how it is
done for future Sea Partnership activities. An invitation to the Workshop was also extended
to the leader of a Thai coastal institute that has expressed interest in working on a South
East Regional Sea Grant initiative with Indonesia and NOAA, so that everyone would meet
in Indonesia and discuss the possible design of such a program. There was also an invitation from NOAA to second a MMAF staff person in their International Affairs Office to help
coordinate the Indonesian and proposed South East Asian Sea Grant Regional Programs.
In addition to these tasks, the Indonesian team held meetings with the World Bank about
the Coral Reef Rehabilitation and Management Project, including the topic of extension, and
with the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) regarding their Indonesian portfolio. Three members of
the team (Mr. Supardan, Dr. Ginting, Ms. Ning) extended their stay by a few days to visit the
Rhode Island programs, hosted by the Coastal Resources Center.
The increased capacity of the Indonesian coastal government officials is easily demonstrated
as each visit to the USA has accomplished more business and been conducted with less
need for facilitation. In addtion, as the Sea Partnership evolves in design and implementation, the spesific questions are easier to identify and the answers become more valuable in
addressing each decision-point.
20
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
3
Designing the Sea Partnership
Program
3.1 General Objectives and Principles
T
he outcomes of these various study tours to the United States and Canada, and
the public consultations within the National Law process created a core set of
principles and objectives that became the foundation for the new Sea Partnership
initiative. The design evolved organically, either from concepts and mandates
generated from the consultation process or the Ministry, or when there was no experience
or preference, or by using the U.S. Sea Grant model’s features as a default. For instance,
the Sea Partnership’s priority themes are limited to those in a single division of the Ministry
rather than the priorities defined by a national advisory group as in the U.S. model. On the
other hand, in defining the types of activities the program can support, the Sea Partnership
started with the three Sea Grant approaches (education, outreach and applied research) and
simply added one more that was relevant for Indonesia at this time (policy development).
Basic rationale for the pilot initiative are that the Sea Partnership:
• Serve as a tool to better implement core programs in the ministry’s Coasts and Small
Islands division that will sustainably develop the marine sector and the capacity of the
regions
• Access capacity within regional universities for local development needs (breaks the ivory
tower complex), strengthening marine institutional capacity at the local level
• Match national strategic priorities with regional priorities and regional development issues
• Operat within the framework of democratic decentralization
The three primary goals are:
• First, to develop partnerships among universities, central and local government, private
sector, and non-governmental organizations that solve local problems and transfer science
and technology to coastal community groups towards a "blue revolution" as an engine of
coastal economic growth
• Second, to prepare data and information as a basis for making coastal and small islands
management decisions regarding utilization, conservation, and rehabilitation of coastal
and marine resources.
• Thirdly, to conduct outreach activities for coastal communities on assessments and specific
local management alternatives.
As codified in the new coastal legislation currently under review, the Sea Partnership program would have a legislative base, national, regional and local funding sources, integrated
21
Developing The Indonesian Partnership Program
research and extension services and wide latitude for local innovation and control, while at
the same time it would be guided by national priorities. A Sea Partnership Program would
institutionally link universities, the national marine agency and the local offices of fisheries
and marine affairs, the private sector and non-governmental organizations. The introduction
and building of an extension program (not yet implemented in year one) especially focused
on coastal and marine resources and resource users would address one of the most pressing
issues in Indonesia, that of low capacity for economic development. Describing the universitygovernment partnership as a “trigger” for development of the marine sector, and a long-term
source for producing coastal and marine experts, the program would help Indonesia manage
the more than two-thirds of its area that is coastal and marine.
The adaptation of existing technologies through a Sea Partnership program for direct application to coastal villages would increase locally available options for alternative incomes
and contribute to the continuing development of the nation while supporting more sustainable use of coastal and marine resources. Regional universities, where the highest regional
capacity resides, would lead the Sea Partnership program. This in effect would create a
system through which capacity gaps at regional and local levels could be effectively addressed, and would provide an appropriate way for the central government to assist in the
further development of regional capacity.
After Indonesia’s long period of central government controls, such partnerships could accelerate the development of the local capacity to sustainably self-manage local coastal resources
by finding new solutions and transferring that knowledge quickly to the local communities.
Part of this concept is to use the Sea Partnership to facilitate and expand a “blue revolution” in
Indonesia while empowering local communities to steward their economies and resources.
There were other qualitative principles that were introduced by the Ministry’s team to characterize the ideal development of the Sea Partnership Program. These included an openness
and commitment of all the partners. This program was to provide “seed money” and matching funds – it was not to be considered a handout or money “due” to an institution. There
was a clear expectation that the participants would help each other, teach each other, share
resources and costs (taken in part from the Sea Grant Week where the Indonesian team were
welcomed into the Sea Grant “family” and really felt the support that entailed). There were
examples in the earliest descriptions of what the Sea Partnership could do for Indonesia that
defined a community spirit as using cross visits between Regional Centers to share experiences –good or bad, or to lend a hand to a fellow Regional Center by providing assistance
or an expert or a piece of equipment or a space in a training program. There was, at last, a
sense that all the participants were embarking on a wonderful adventure, creating together
something new and good that in the near future would be considered indispensable. People
and institutions were challenged to be innovative, proactive, and to take bureaucratic risks
(legal ones!) if needed.
3.2 The National Sea Partnership Office
As described, the Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries’ Directorate General of Coasts and
22
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
Small Islands (MMAF/CSI) is the home of the Sea Partnership Program, due mostly to the
presence here also of the Draft National Coastal Management Law (which would mandate
the SPP) and Dr. Pratikto as Director General. There are other, potentially relevant divisions in the Ministry where a Sea Partnership Program might also be extremely effective
and valuable. These include the Directorate General (DG) of Captive Fisheries, the DG of
Culture Fisheries and the Research Bureau, among others. However, due to its origin in the
DG of Coasts and Small Islands and Dr. Pratikto’s advocacy, it was deemed more likely to
succeed as a new initiative if it began where it already had a mandate and a following. Once
the program is established, it could move up or across the DGs, moving into the areas more
traditionally supported by the U.S Sea Grant Program (e.g., mariculture, fisheries). There
has been a reasonable amount of “socialization” or outreach through the agency about the
Sea Partnership Program, and although there is a lot of interest, others are watching the
pilot to see its success before spending their political and economic capital to engage in
this early stage.
During this initial phase, the MMAF Directorate General of Coasts and Small Islands used
an approved budget from the Indonesia National Parliament of US$325,000 for FY-2003 to
organize and initiate activities within the Sea Partnership Program. Approximately half of
that amount was kept for the National Office and the rest was used to support the Regional
Centers.
The budget for the National Sea Partnership Program Office was designed to cover the
staff time needed to develop the program, to create new administrative procedures (such
as a mechanism that could transfer federal funds to selected universities), to travel to the
regions to monitor and facilitate the regional centers’ work, to promote the new initiative to
core and potential counterparts and the public, to hold one or two national Sea Partnership
Workshops and several smaller meetings, to conduct some staff trainings, and, if needed,
to conduct some national-level activity for the Sea Partnership Program.
An informal “Sea Partnership Team” or working group of approximately 20 people designed,
managed and advised the National Program: Approximately two-thirds of the people were
from inside the Ministry and the rest were from academia and the CRMP. The MMAF Director
General of Coasts and Small Islands serves as the director of the initiative with the day-today management of the team conducted by his deputy Ali Supardan. Ms. Ida Kusuma, Chief
of Program Management in the CSI Division has approximately 25% of her time assigned to
coordinate the initiative and handle most of the administrative details. The Directors for each
of the five CSI Programs and one of their technical sub-directors were included in the working
group, each set assigned as Liaison for one of the Regional Centers. In order to provide an
academic voice in the development of the program at the national level, the MMAF invited
well-respected academicians from four leading universities in the Jakarta/Central Java area
(Bogor Agricultural Institute (IPB), University of Indonesia (UI), the Institute of Technology In
Bandung (ITB) and University of Gajah Mada in Yogakarta (UGM)) to assist the Ministry with
program design and to help mentor the Regional Centers. During year one, these university
advisors served without fee or salary, receiving only their travel costs from the Ministry. From
the Coastal Resources Management Project, the Senior Technical Advisor and one part-time
technical support staff person joined the working group as an advisor and as support to the
23
Developing The Indonesian Partnership Program
Secretariat, respectively. (See Figure 1) Meetings of the larger working group were held on
an as-needed basis, occurring on an average of every 2 months. Several smaller meetings
of whom-ever were available, but particularly with the MMAF managers (Dr. Pratikto, Mr.
Supardan, Ms. Kusuma) and the CRMP team were held more often, as needed, approximately monthly, with Sea Partnership as an agenda item at other venues almost weekly as
various people reported to the Director General (Dr. Pratikto), the Program Manager, Mr. Ali
Supardan or Ms. Kusuma.
In comparison, the U.S. National Sea Grant office has a small full-time staff of approximately
ten people that coordinates and funds the state programs. There were several rationales
for using a large working group at the beginning of the Indonesian program. Many reasons
were unstated but became clear over time. The first was the Director General’s desire to
be inclusive rather than exclusive in the development and “ownership” of this new initiative.
There were no jealousies apparent at all, despite the clear recognition that this initiative was
a favorite project. There was enough redundancy in the group that each point of view was
usually present when needed, and the added work burden for each person was minimized
(remember this initiative had no full-time staff or budget of its own from the start—all were
“borrowed” from other sources). There was no formal national advisory group as in the U.S.
model for the initiation of the Sea Partnership Program so this group helped to broaden the
point a view to some degree; since the MMAF was a new agency, many of their technical
staff had been transferred from other ministries such as agriculture and forestry. The prime
administrative responsibilities quickly fell to a few and the larger group was only called together when there were major design decisions to be made or communicated, and when new
implementation tasks needed to be delegated. This delegation happened “naturally” as well,
rather than by design, an approach frequently used by designers in unknown territory. As
the various types of tasks became identified, it was simple at the end of the first year to now
write a Terms-of- Reference or “roles and responsibilities” statement for the various players,
helping to focus their time and effort on tasks that reflect their comparative advantage and
availability. By keeping everyone engaged in all aspects at the beginning, it perhaps was
not as efficient a process as possible, but it helped everyone involved to better understand
what the initiative was trying to do and how, while it gave them a sense of being an insider,
with the added benefit to the initiative of their good ideas and innovations.
There are plans to consider what type of Steering Committee or Advisory Board the Sea Partnership will need in the longer term. Such a group, known in Indonesia as a “Board of Panel”
already exists for the National Coastal Management Law program, and there are other boards
or institutions that might serve as an advisory group, depending on where in the Ministry the
final initiative resides, and what the role of the group will be in the Sea Partnership.
3.3 The National Themes or Priorities for Year 1
The Sea Partnership funds provided during Year 1 to address priorities and themes under the
responsibility of the Directorate General of Coasts and Small Island, (i.e., the division’s five
program areas: a) Coastal Management, b) Small Island Development, c) Conservation and
Marine Protected Areas, d) Spatial Planning, and e) Community Economic Development).
24
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
The Regional Centers were all provided with copies of the Directorate General’s Strategic
Plan that detailed the individual vision, mission, goals and programmatic activities in the five
areas for their understanding of the priorities for funding. (See Figure 1)
The rationale for this choice of priorities is quite basic. First, the Ministry had spent the first
couple of years of its existence creating its strategy and priorities, so these were current,
mandated but not yet achieved. Second, the start-up strategy for funding the Sea Partnership
initiative (before the national law mandates funds) was to use existing funding sources, and
just “re-package” them, so that those mandates of the original funds that overlapped the Sea
Partnership objectives could be administered under the Sea Partnership Program housed in
the same Ministry. A third reason was to streamline the start-up of the initiative. The need for
the Sea Partnership was clear, and the Ministry did not want to invest an unknown amount
of time and financial resources in the planning phase – the strategy was that implementation
of effective partnerships, even on a small scale, would be more effective in attracting funds,
achieving codification by law and soliciting partners than a long planning process.
This streamlining leads to another very important design characteristic of the Sea Partnership Program: designing and implementing the initiative in real time. Due to several reasons
(the need for the initiative’s outcomes, its status as a pilot, and the sense that good models
already existed (i.e. the Sea Grant Program)), the Sea Partnership initiative used a “designby-doing” approach. The concept evolution and design, the planning for each element, the
proposals and the implementation of activities were conducted almost simultaneously. This
required excellent coordination, extreme flexibility and adaptability of the participants as
the program evolved in front of them and with their guidance to a large extent), meaning
that there were several small bumps and required changes along the way. This was fairly
well understood and tolerated well by participants, but it did create some frustrations and
several cases where short-term policy decisions had to be made to accommodate the lack
of extensive preparation for the Initiative. This will be described more fully in the section on
the National Sea Partnership Workshops and funding that follow.
3.4 The Types of Activities Funded
The Indonesian Sea Partnership funded institutional development of the Regional Centers,
adopted the three U.S. Sea Grant fundable types of programmatic activities and added a
fourth. The types of programmatic activities fundable under the pilot of the Sea Partnership
Program were: a) Outreach and Extension, b) Education and Training, c) Applied Research
and d) Policy Development. Each of the 5 Regional Centers/Consortia was authorized a
budget of one hundred million rupiah (approximately $12,000) for institutional development.
This included holding strategic planning meetings to develop their consortia, proposals and
organization; paying staff time for assistance; travel to the national meetings; telephone and
communications; consumables, and the like. Under the regulations for the funding mechanism adapted from the Ministry’s portfolio, these funds could not be used to purchase capital
equipment such as computers, projectors, etc.
Each Regional Center was also invited to write proposals for programmatic activities for up
25
Developing The Indonesian Partnership Program
to 191 million rupiah (approximately $23,000) for implementation in the first year, January
to December 2003. Again, capital equipment was not allowed, but less expensive materials (measuring tapes, dyes, etc.) and the costs of conducting the activities (workshops and
trainings, creating publications and materials, travel, etc.) were allowed expenses. This equation is different from the U.S. Sea Grant model where the amount given to the various state
programs varies by a formula based upon the length of state’s coastline and its population.
Since this Indonesian initiative was a pilot, and not yet mandated to be conducted across the
nation, this even distribution of funds between the five Regional Centers was thought to be
the simplest and most equitable start-up budget for the program and received no negative
comments or complaints. However, it was stated multiple times, in different venues, that this
equation and allocation would be reconsidered in the future to address these other issues of
need, capacity and successful demonstrations of partnerships that achieve results.
A brief description of the types of programmatic activities that were fundable under the Sea
Partnership initiative follows, based first on the U.S. Sea Grant model with the addition of
some adaptations from the Indonesian working group.
a) Outreach and Extension5
Transferring science, knowledge, information and skill to many people is a process that cannot be done without clear and specific efforts. Intensive communications, outreach, extension and advocacy (see note below on advocacy) are important ways to accelerate capacity
development and community empowerment. To that end, various effective communication
and information transfer tools need to be integrated among the various parties and need to
be disseminated properly to many audiences.
Each Regional Center should have a communications program funded either under the organizational development package or under a proposed grant activity. In the U.S. Sea Grant
model, a Communications Specialist is a required staff person for each state program and
many states have more than one person working on this task. Communications and outreach
activities communicate information, including Sea Grant and other relevant research, to
coastal users, stakeholder groups and the general public. This can be done in a number of
ways, including producing brochures, newsletters, books, fact-sheets, news releases, web
pages, videos, CD ROMs, conferences, radio and TV programs.
Extension is another form of communication and technology transfer. This type of activity
includes adult training that transfers technology and knowledge to users (often the results
of a Sea Grant applied research activity), linked to a communications outreach program for
public and professionals on new policies, approaches, issues, etc. In the U.S. Sea Grant
Program, each state program has several (average 10!) full-time paid Extension Specialists
who are staff of the University (but not presently teaching faculty). The Extension Specialist
(Mariculture, Legal, Fisheries, Conservation, Sea Food Safety, Marine Transportation, Tour-
5.
26
At first there was some language/translation confusion about Outreach, Education and Extension. Early document name
the four types of SPP activities as Outreach, Extention, Policy, and Applied Research. After some clarifying discussions, the
four categories became: Extension and Outreach, Education and Training, Policy Development, and Applied Research.
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
ism, Technology, etc.) develops one or more activities with his/her “theme” Local Advisory
Committee of specialist stakeholders and a local network. The Extension Specialist develops
the proposal with the partners (he/she may be coordinating several projects or activities each
year), manages the commitments of partners, coordinates and helps to evaluate the activity.
Co-funds for a project activity might include, in addition to state funds, an unused soccer field
of a junior college loaned for a mariculture demonstration site, materials donated or at cost
from private sector, brood stock of fish or shrimp provided by fishers, etc. The Activity Leader
(usually a faculty or staff member), the Extension Specialist and often students collaborate
to run the demonstrations and bring groups of users in to learn the new method. Often this
includes mentoring, and possible developing a “start-up” package negotiated with private
sector, etc. The range of project activities and structures of the partnerships are limited only
by the imagination and cooperation of the partners involved and should be based on the local
priority problems that require solving. This is the most innovative and powerful component
of the Sea Partnership (or Sea Grant) Program.
In Indonesia, the low educational level in most coastal communities is a critical gap for local
development. Unfortunately, the number of skilled people, field facilitators and educators who
understand the characteristics and potential of coastal and marine resources and who could
educate communities are very few. A number of proactive coastal and marine practitioners
who can explore and utilize resources optimally need to be developed and utilized. The
development of an extension program is considered highly valuable, and will be addressed
in Year Two of the Initiative. In the meantime, individual extension activities were invited
for inclusion in the first year of grants, developed by the University and its advisors, until
“Extension Officers” can be trained or developed for the future.
Advocacy is a characteristic that the U.S. Sea Grant Program avoids at great length, believing
that their unbiased, “honest broker” role helps them to pull partners together to determine
“fact-based” outcomes that all stakeholders can support. In Indonesia, this concept in the Sea
Partnership is still under discussion, and is being addressed in Year One on a case-by-case
basis. Due to the extreme poverty of many of Indonesia’s coastal residents, and the tough
challenges facing conservation and sustainable development in the country, advocacy is
seen as a positive characteristic. It may just be a difference in the use of the word advocacy.
Examples of activities that the Sea Partnership considered advocacy and for which it is inviting proposals include activities important to the economic empowerment and improvement
for coastal communities, the gradual opening of access to capital, knowledge and markets,
coral management and coastal rehabilitation programs (artificial reefs, mangrove replanting), among others. As the initiative matures, and the principles of Extension are learned and
adapted in the next year or two of the program, this concept will be re-considered.
b) Education and Training
Education of marine and aquatic professionals, as in many fields, is a long-term process; it
begins in the younger years when children are first exposed to different sectors and types of
careers, advances through university training, and often includes internships or fellowships
that assist the transition into paid professional positions. A marine literate public (i.e., nonmarine professionals) is also important to the good management of coastal areas. Education
27
Developing The Indonesian Partnership Program
at all levels is a cornerstone of U.S. Sea Grant and includes graduate and undergraduate education, teacher training, K-12 curriculum development, marine policy fellowships
in Washington, fellowships in cooperation with private industry, informal education for the
general public, special training programs for industry, and much more. The importance of
these activities is reflected in the distribution of the budget, which apportions approximately
one-third for Education and Human Resources. (See Figure 2)
Most of the U.S. Sea Grant Education Program activities focus on teachers of the school
children (K-12) in order to develop a more marine literate youth and to prepare future marine
and aquatic professionals. In this case, an Education Specialist works with local network
and Advisory Committees in ad hoc manner to develop needed activities and includes them
in bi-annual proposals to the state Sea Grant Program. The Specialist collects a team to
generate the materials and the training of educators (or direct training of students also) for
general awareness, local content of science texts, building a culture of coastal management,
and developing good behaviors, tools and interest in environmental stewardship. Co-funding
usually come from local school systems (facilities), teachers (in-kind time), and local private
sector (materials, boat trips, transportation costs, etc.). Examples of activities include the
development and implementation of a school unit on mangroves that includes field trips and
speakers and lab activities for different levels of students, or a School Quiz competition on
Oceanography for high school students with prizes, or Annual Ocean Day events in a school
system, etc.
In the Sea Partnership case, a university that has many skilled and well-educated people is
expected to transfer science and knowledge they have to broader audiences and group of
communities. This can be done through many ways, for instance, developing models and
relevant curriculum, making teacher’s kits for use in the classrooms, involving senior university
students to directly interact with coastal communities in education or extension programs,
supporting graduate work, etc. Various internship programs and work placement, as well as
extension to coastal community empowerment can be arranged with relevant stakeholders.
The Indonesian universities already have a student “community service” program (“KKN”) that
places students in communities for a semester or a year to provide technical assistance, and
this is a possible vehicle for a “coastal” assignment. In the first year of the Sea Partnership
Program there was one proposed activity that focused on school curriculum, but this is a very
fertile field for further efforts of the Sea Partnership. There have already been discussions
with the Ministry of Education and these will become more formal after the first year of the
pilot initiative has been completed and evaluated.
c) Applied Research
The U.S. Sea Grant College Program addresses long-term national needs by focusing on
strategic applied research carried out by university faculty on coastal issues. Extension
Specialists bring new problems to the university scientists who develop an experiment or
proposal trying to find solutions. Communities, users and the private sector provide the raw
materials (brood stock, feed), the scientists can fund student theses while providing practical answers to the extension specialist and the communications team who then create an
outreach process or product to institutionalize the result.
28
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
Research activities in Sea Partnership Program will be focused on answering coastal community and business sector needs in improving efficiency in managing coastal resources
sustainably. A few examples might include:
• Developing a technology for traditional sand mining in order to prevent landslides and
destruction of coastal ecosystems
• Adapting proven mariculture techniques for local mariculture of ‘Lola’ (Trocus niloticus)
and ‘Kima’ (Tridacna Gigantia): developing the brood stock, distributing the viable larvae
to fishermen, determining now to raise them to a more valuable size and age, finally transferring the program fully to the private sector
• Developing marine engineering and marine services such as artificial reefs, environmental
friendly land reclamation methods that prevent coastal erosion, cost-effective householdscale solar power, etc.
• Reducing non-biodegradable rubbish pollution (plastics) and other pollution problems and
monitoring
• Monitoring coastal environmental quality and resources with stakeholders to provide consensus-based information to decision-makers on resource use policies
• Developing genetic manipulation or culture technologies for coral fish such as grouper to
reduce its growth period creating higher economic value
This research would be institutionalized in the Sea Grant/Sea Partnership context through
outreach and extension and would be funded in part by its priority in the local and national
contexts as well as by the quality of the proposed research. If properly integrated with local
and community needs, this applied research could accelerate local marine development and
empower communities.
For Year One of the Sea Partnership, applied research was still invited as a programmatic
activity from the Regional Centers, but was placed at the bottom of the priority list of activities for funding. The Ministry and the Working Group felt that research is often a longer-term
activity, that this pilot initiative was only funded for the first year, and that a lot of information
and research results already existed that had not been communicated to users nor had
the lessons learned from it been implemented. Also, research was a tradition endeavor of
university faculty and staff and therefore did not demand the same level of innovation in the
Sea Partnership as the other activities (Outreach and Extension, Education and Training,
Policy Development). In summary, the start-up initiative could get more value for its investment demonstrating and implementing already known “lessons learned” than funding a new
major research outcome in the first year. However, there is a clear intention to use the Sea
Partnership to generate a lot of applied research in the future once the program is more fully
developed and sure of multiple years of funding.
d) Policy Analysis and Development
A major factor that accompanies development is change - in policies or governance. In Indonesia, this process is evident in the recent laws implemented on decentralization. As authority is
decentralized, new local regulations and guidelines need to be developed on a host of issues.
Often, poorly considered policies have triggered conflicts and complex problems rather than
solving either uncertainty or the original problems. The field of coastal management policy
29
Developing The Indonesian Partnership Program
is Indonesia is quite open, with few if any policies in existence at any level outside of the
fisheries management and coastal security. Some recent efforts to establish policy have been
successful, however, such as the development of the Draft National Coastal Management
Law, and the passage of Provincial, District and Community-level coastal management laws.
These advances in coastal legal reform are taking root and there is wide-spread interest in
replicating or adapting the methods used to create coastal and other natural resource management laws elsewhere in Indonesia. At present, however, there are few good mechanisms
for replicating the USAID project that facilitated the original legal reforms. Mechanisms for
making decisions, the process chosen, and an understanding of the problem by the decision
makers are crucial to legal reform and should be considered carefully.
In the U.S. Sea Grant Program coastal legal specialists have joined the rank of Extension
Officers at the State level of several Sea Grant local programs, and there is a Sea Grant
Law Center that addresses national coastal law and supports the state programs. A legal
specialist is asked to provide unbiased research or analysis of a legal situation to all parties,
or to facilitate a legal reform process. Examples include studying the legal impact of various
policy options for coastal setback variances proposed after a major hurricane; making a
legal analysis of wetlands use; recommending changes to remove conflicts in laws, or communicating new legal information to relevant stakeholders.
For these reasons, the Indonesian Sea Partnership Program chose to support the development of marine policies and community empowerment at both the local and national levels.
Universities serve as an ideal institution for bringing the various ranges of stakeholders
together in the policy process, and the best accessable legal resources reside in the law
faculties of these institutions. Participation of the NGO, community, and private sector groups
will enrich decisions made and can build each of their capacity for participation in legal reform
in other sectors and might promote their influence and support in implementing the policies.
To increase the capacity of the district offices of Fisheries and Marine Programs in policy
development, a program could be established under the Sea Partnership where university
law faculty could be seconded or “loaned” to the government office one day a week or month
to conduct training, review of issues, analysis of legal recommendations, etc.
In Year One of the Sea Partnership, there was at least one proposal submitted to conduct
such a communications and training program regarding a new district coastal law for the
communities impacted by and supported by the new law. Hopefully, this type of activity will
become more commonplace in the Sea Partnership local programs as experience and need
are better understood.
3.5 The Regional Centers
In the U.S. Sea Grant Program, the 30 state programs each have a full-time permanent staff
of six to 35 people. An average of ten people conduct the Extension programs, and average
of two to three people conduct the Communications program, usually one or two conduct
the Education and Training programs with an average of three to four people that handle
the management of the state program. It has taken the U.S. Program more than 20 years to
30
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
grow to this size and strength, but it does indicate the level of popularity and commitment to
continue co-funding the state programs at this level of human resources on the part of both
the States and the Federal government. The Research program is usually managed by the
Deputy Director of the State Program and is conducted by faculty members (not employed by
Sea Grant) at a Sea Grant member institution. Their participation is based upon successful
Sea Grant proposals that result in grants awarded to conduct the work.
The MMAF is facilitating and supporting a “bottom-up” design and implementation of the
Sea Partnership Program, beginning with the selection of a major university in each of five
regions (East Java, North Sulawesi, South Sulawesi, East Kalimantan and West Sumatra).
The announcement of the first five Regional Centers was made in October 2002 at the
First National Sea Partnership Workshop (see below for more details about this workshop).
These first Regional Centers were selected in part by their participation in the consultation
process for the Draft National Coastal Management Law, their expression of interest and
their reputation as leading centers of excellence in academia and in coastal management.
Nonetheless, there are differences in the level of capacity of the Regional Centers selected,
and some were included for their strategic strengths, either due to other well-funded coastal
management work developing in the area or the presence of a mentor in the region such as
the Coastal Resources Management Project.
While the National Sea Partnership Office will connect the Regional Centers to each other
to facilitate information transfer, cross-training, shared research and other important activities that could be implemented in a national network, each consortium will operate relatively
independently. Each regional consortium will operate as a semi-autonomous, regionally
focused center by establishing its own regional priorities and securing local funding for
programs that address these priorities. This allows independence in funding projects or
programs of high local importance while still retaining some focus on established national
priorities. (See Figure 3).
Indonesia initially took a regional approach rather than working province by province (i.e.,
state by state) to better match its system of strong regional universities and to provide the
most effective program with the simplest start-up for the pilot year of the program. These core
universities were directed to create and lead a local consortium of colleges, local government
agencies, private sector and other interested parties to develop proposals and implement
activities in FY-2003. This is different from the U.S. program where U.S. Sea Grant institutions
or consortiums are made up solely of university members. The Indonesian private sector and
state governments play advisory roles in the development of the initiative and local programs,
serve as partners in proposals, and provide match budgetary contributions.
Of the five Regional Centers, four host universities were already active members in INCUNE,
the Indonesian Coastal University Network and therefore already had some capacity developed since its inception in 1999. These are:
• University Bung Hatta and University of Andalas in Padang, West Sumatra
• UNMUL - Mulawarman University in Samarinda, East Kalimantan
• UNHAS - Hasanuddin University in Makassar, South Sulawesi
• UNSRAT - Sam Ratulangi University in Manado, North Sulawesi
31
Developing The Indonesian Partnership Program
The fifth Regional Center was selected, among other criteria mentioned above, based upon
the Director General’s familiarity with its coastal engineering strengths and with the urban
nature of its issues, as well as with the strong regional capacity with several other universities in the area. The fifth host university is:
• ITS – Institute of Technology of Surabaya, East Java
For the record, two other INCUNE members are also involved in the Initiative (more than
half of the INCUNE Network members were included in the initial pilot overall), as advisors
to the National Sea Partnership Center described above. These are:
• IPB - Bogor Agricultural University in Bogor
• UI - University of Indonesia in Jakarta
The regional centers were intentionally given almost no guidance from the Ministry in their
process for creating a consortium other than the general structure seen in Figure 1. MMAF
selected an academic leader from each major regional center to began the development of
the regional center. In most cases, this person became the director of the consortium. According to the standards set by the Directorate General for Coast and Small Island Affairs,
the consortia must be interdepartmental within each participating university and inter-organizational regarding other universities, local government, non-governmental organizations and
the private sector directly fostering innovation in governance. The only other principles were
that it should operate in an open and balanced, mutually supportive manner. This latitude,
according to Dr. Pratikto, was to encourage the Regional Centers to reflect the strength and
existing relationships between local institutions, and in adoption of the U.S. Sea Grant model
of diverse structures among the various state programs. It was also a ‘fast track’ approach.
Rather than force the regional centers to create an additional layer of forced bureaucracy
or a new institution, with lengthy debates before doing any activities in what might end up
being a short-term initiative, Regional Centers were encouraged to ‘get started’ and remain
open and flexible to adapt, if needed, as the program evolved. These consortia were to establish charters that specified the principles of operation for each consortium, including how
projects and priority areas would be determined for funding, how funds would be distributed
and progress monitored for those funded projects.
In Indonesia the formation of these regional consortia contributes directly to fostering innovation in governance. As in many other places in the world, good governance is facilitated
through this kind of inter-organizational cooperation focused on coastal-dependent economic
development, community empowerment, public participation and other coastal and marine
management governance, conservation and development issues. Fostering economic development and improved governance and democracy through the Sea Partnership Program
is one of the overarching objectives of the Directorate General of Coast and Small Island
Affairs.
The five regional centers responded very differently. Some consortiums placed the university as the leading institution in the Regional Center’s program implementation, while others
proposed that all institutions in the consortium have the same opportunity and the consortium have no leading institution. In that case, all institutions would have an equal right to be
elected the chairman of the consortium through its members.
32
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
East Java quickly created a large, complex consortium with other universities and stakeholders, requiring a “start-up fee” from partners to cover costs for meetings and joint activities
to match the national funds, and is already moving forward using this mechanism to solicit
other funds so that the Sea Partnership will be only one of its funding sources. It had an
open solicitation for proposals for Year One and went through an internal selection process
before proposing its final few to the National Program for funding.
In North Sulawesi, there were no real issues as the host university took the lead because
it had the greatest strength in marine affairs and law, but other universities are included as
members, along with the other stakeholders, in deciding policy and writing proposals. For
Year One, a small team of the state and district marine offices, one marine private sector
organization and the host university developed most of the proposals. During the year, a
larger group was formed (approximately 35 people) that meet as an advisory stakeholder
group; the management of the program is conducted by the university (Faculty of Fisheries)
and overseen by a core group of the stakeholders (about five people).
In East Kalimantan the program got off to a slower start, but eventually ended up with an
arrangement similar to North Sulawesi’s.
In a fourth instance, the two lead institutions in the region finally agreed, for the short term,
to rotate leadership of the program annually, although it is not clear yet if that means the
administration of the program or just the leadership/chair of the Consortium. In every case, it
is clear that the funds would be run through the university and not any other type of institution
at this time. Regardless of who held the leadership of the Consortium, the University would
manage the implementation of the program.
In South Sulawesi Province, the regional center development was led by University of Hasanuddin. The Regional Center Consortium was established after a series of workshops involving a range of stakeholders including NGO, universities, South Sulawesi Marine and Fishery
council, and local government. The consortium selected representatives from stakeholders
institutions to manage the program.
Currently, regional consortia are in place in the five regional centers, charters for operation of
these consortia have been established; proposals for first year of funding have been submitted, reviewed, amended and approved. Each Regional Center has developed and executed
a Memorandum of Understanding between the Ministry and the host university.
In the next sections, the criteria for the proposals and the review process will be described for
Year One of the Sea Partnership Program. It is hoped that the number of Regional Centers
can expand in the near future as the Sea Partnership Program gets formally authorized by
law, and that these universities and consortia will become an active network of resources
and knowledge that in closely coordinated such as the network of Coral Reef Information
and Technology Centers established by a recent international loan project, or on its own.
33
Developing The Indonesian Partnership Program
3.6 Criteria for the Proposals from the Regions
Although there had been few or no guidelines given to the Regional Centers for establishing
their consortia, there were some clear but simple guidelines given for the development of the
proposals and by what criteria they would be evaluated. Funding of the Regional Centers
would only be allocated if the Center’s proposals satisfied the defined requirements.
In the U.S. Sea Grant Program, the development, evaluation and selection of proposals is very
highly structured, and includes, as described above, a couple of rounds of review, including
external reviews. However, in the circumstances of the Sea Partnership start-up, there was
very little time to develop and review proposals much less to create a detailed process. In
addition, everyone wanted to encourage participants with success rather than discourage
them with many rules and constraints. The greater objective was to get activities underway,
preferably ones that fit the more innovative Sea Grant model rather than traditional activities
familiar in Indonesia. Therefore, the review process was very generous, requesting more
participation from counterparts more often than criticizing the technical approach, trying,
meanwhile to make certain that the outcomes of the activities would be worth presenting.
Criteria for approving proposals from the Regional Centers were discussed by the National
Working Group and the Regional Centers, formally and informally, resulting in the follow
guidance for the first year of the program:
There were two sets of criteria applied in the Sea Partnership program implementation,
namely the criteria for administrative or institutional development funds, and the criteria for
proposed programmatic activities from the Regional Centers.
•
Administrative/Institutional Proposal: The proposal package should: (i) Be complete
(Terms of Reference, budget, etc), (ii) Be evaluated and approved by the Sea Partnership
Central Team, (iii) Be submitted by a legal institution or organization, and (iv) Be accompanied by an organizational profile, mission, vision, work plan, etc.
•
Programmatic Activities Proposals: The Proposals should (i) Match one of the structural
themes of MMAF’s DG-Coasts and Small Island (Small Islands, Coastal Management,
Conservation, Spatial Planning, Community Development), (ii) Match one approved type
of activity (outreach/extension, education/training, policy or applied research), (iii) Match
identified local priorities, (iv) Lead to improved quality of the coastal environment, (v)
Solve an immediate local coastal problem or conflict, (vi) Be based on good information
and effective methodology, (vii) Be complete by December 2003, (viii) Improve capacity
of community/stakeholders, (ix) Provide measurable impact and achievable goals, (x)
Involve partners, (xi) Be co-funded by community/stakeholders, (xii) Have a meaningful
impact on environment, community and institutions, (xiii) Match with budget allocated by
DG CSI, (xiv) Lead to sustainability of the program.
The proposals from the Regional Centers were presented at the Second National Sea Partnership Workshop in May 2003, and reviewed in principle at that venue by the plenary body.
Final comments and approvals for the proposals for three of the Centers were approved in
34
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
June by the National Working Group, and for the last two Centers in September 2003. There
is clearly a time-line challenge evident in these dates as approved proposals and funding did
not arrive at some of the Centers until September 2003, and all work needed to be completed
by December 2003. Although this was clearly frustrating for everyone involved, it was not
an insurmountable problem. First, the Ministry had asked that all the proposed activities be
“on the ground” and ready to go, i.e., part of another on-going program or something that
could be easily (and quickly) implemented. Second, in the spirit of “designing while doing” the
process left one major factor out of synchronization: the approval of a funding mechanism to
transfer funds from the National Ministry’s budget to the Universities (see section below on
funding for more on this) and everyone understood the bureaucratic realities. Third, many of
the participants were also otherwise preoccupied so were willing to schedule their programmatic activities in the latter part of the year, and indeed, most did not begin until after the
Third National Sea Partnership Workshop in September 2003 when the program “nuts and
bolts” and the expectations were clearer for everyone (see section below on workshops for
more on this).
It has already been agreed that the proposal development and review process for Year Two
and beyond for the Sea Partnership should evolve into something more formal, competitive
and open. However, this process worked reasonably well under the ‘quick start-up’ approach
agreed upon by the Ministry as everyone saw this first year as a learning process more than
an output-driven process.
3.7 Proposed Activities from the Regional Centers
There is not enough space to or purpose in going into detail about the individual activities
proposed by the Regional Center at this time. A full description of the activities and the results
of the work will be reported in January 2004 at the end of the first year’s program. However it
is possible to provide the basic themes of the individual proposals for completeness here.
The topics of the proposals from the Regional Centers for Year One were:
• West Sumatra: Socio-economic development and fishery technology development at small
islands (One Proposal)
• East Java: Rehabilitation of coastal area of the Kamal Strait in Gresik District, Bangkalan
District, and Surabaya City; Strengthening coastal institutions; Evaluation of the Coastal
Economic Empowerment Program (PEMP) for Year 2003 in 8 Districts (Three Proposals),
• North Sulawesi: Assessment of coastal resources on two of Indonesia’s outer most Islands;
Extension training on new coastal legislation among affected communities; Support for
stakeholder-operated coastal monitoring program (Three Proposals)
• South Sulawesi: Improve Silvo Fishery Management and include info in 'coasts and small
islands' local curriculum for elementary and high schools in 3 sub-districts (Education);
Small-scale marine resource management: Pilot project for local sustainable use of resources on island in Tana Keke (Research); Increase community income by optimizing
post-harvest management (Extension); Identify strategic issues for utilizing marine resources and formulating policy for Takalar district (Policy). (Note: one proposal for each
35
Developing The Indonesian Partnership Program
•
36
of the 4 types of activities to “try” the approach).
East Kalimantan: Coastal community empowerment through shrimp hatchery development
and training of users; Supporting internships with conservation NGO’s field program for
university students.
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
4
Funding Sources
4.1 Finding Partners
I
n the true spirit of partnership, several sources of funding supported the development and
implementation of the first year of the Sea Partnership Program. In the U.S. Sea Grant
Program, the NOAA budget has a line item in it for the Sea Grant budget that covers the
National Program and the matching funds for the state programs. The States must contribute a minimum of $1 for every $2 of federal funds from their State budget, whatever budget
category they choose. Additional funds and in-kind goods and services come from the individual
partners in the various activities. Since the Sea Partnership began as a concept under the
National Coastal Management Law development program, and developed into an un-funded
pilot initiative, a little more creativity was required.
Basically, there are 5 (five) main financial sources used to fund the implementation of the Indonesian Sea Partnership Program in Year One and these are described briefly below. (See
Figure 4).
i. The National Development Budget (APBN) is a yearly-based financial source approved
by the House of Representative of Indonesia (DPR) after reviewing proposals from related
ministries. For Year One implementation (2003), the DPR approved around USD $270,000
to fund the Sea Partnership Program (SPP) implemented through the Ministry of Marine
Affairs and Fisheries (MMAF) Directorate General of Coasts and Small Islands (CSI).
ii. The De-Concentration budget is a specific fund allocated for implementing a ministry’s program at local/regional levels that is also sourced from National Development Budget (APBN)
as a set-aside and is often project-based. Some of the Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries
programs that are using the De-Concentration budget such as the Coral Reef Rehabilitation
and Management Project (COREMAP), the Coastal Community Economic Empowerment
(PEMP), and the Marine and Coastal Resources Management Program (MCRMP) have
agreed to and committed to participate in implementing the Sea Partnership Program for
year 2004 through collaborative work and coordination. Each of these projects has mandates
and objectives that overlap those of the Sea Partnership Program and therefore provide
leveraged funding for the collaborative work. The criteria for those funds may include some
specific geographical or activity or partner demands that will place some limits on use of the
funds, but MMAF considers it feasible to link the funds to appropriate projects that serve both
mandates. For instance, the MCRMP is facilitating the development of coastal management
laws in 15 districts, some of which are already in the locations of existing Sea Partnership
Regional Centers.
37
Developing The Indonesian Partnership Program
iii. The Local/Regional Development Budget (APBD) is an annual financial source that is approved by the local House of Representative (DPRD) after reviewing local/regional development proposals submitted by local governments. Eventually, this will be the source of the
“Regional Matching Fund”, but since the regions are just now creating their first decentralized
budgets and many are under-funded, the Ministry has only asked that the local governments
contribute “something” for Year One, with increases in the future. For instance, in the case of
North Sulawesi and the work in the remote islands, the Provincial government provided the
boat transportation (12 hours each way) for the university teams going to conduct fieldwork,
and also volunteered to purchase walkie-talkies and GPS receivers for those conducing the
surveys. Proposals submitted with local governmental contributions should be consistent
with the priority issues identified by their Regional Center Consortium.
iv. The Stakeholders’ contribution is to be raised through participation of local/regional stakeholders such as universities, private sectors, NGOs, and communities who have common
interests in the priority issues that will be addressed. The contribution can be in form of
direct funds and/or in-kind support – such as facilities, academic and technical assistance,
etc. All the Regional Center universities have been told they are expected to contribute a
small operations office with at least part-time staff to support the initiative at the host campus. Most of the Regional Centers have already accomplished this, and it will be surveyed
and verified in December 2003/ January 2004 by the National Center’s evaluation team.
For another example, the private sector in North Sulawesi has offered dive boat time and
support for survey teams and staff time to learn the methods in 2004 for future stakeholder
monitoring. The petroleum companies acting in two of the Regional Centers have expressed
their willingness to develop and implement community programs together.
v. The International Donor’s contribution is both direct financial support through grants and
technical assistance provided by foreign institutions under bilateral government cooperation to address specific issues or programs. In the development of the Sea Partnership,
the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) supported all of the
study tours to the USA in 2000 – 2003, much of the Consultative Process during the national consultations for the Draft National Law, a few thousand dollars in small grants to
the Regional Centers and some of the costs of the national workshops. In addition, the
CRMP contributed approximately 20-25% of the time for the Senior Technical Advisor
and a Technical Specialist for the 2001-2003 period as facilitators, mentors, and support
for the secretariat of the Working Group. Addtional advisory assistance and a significant
small grants program are planned for 2004-2005 programmatic years in Indonesia under
the USAID/CRMP II. The participation of NOAA and the other U.S. State Sea Grant Programs also falls under this category, facilitated and coordinated by CRMP and CRMP II
ut contributed directly as in-kind or services to the Ministry and staff. Other donors have
expressed an interest is partnering with the Sea Partnership Program on various activities,
including JICA (Japan International Cooperation Agency), the Japan Society for Science
Promotion, LOICZ and ZMT- Jerman serta CIDA - Canada for the future.
This large number of funding sources is coordinated through the National Program Office and
is anticipated to become more complex as the program develop. Plans to keep the finances
transparent are already in process.
38
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
4.2 The Funding Process
There were two primary methods of distributing the funds, according to the Ministry: (1)
Swakelola (Allocation to Independent Management) and (2) Kontraktual (Contract-based
Allocation). In the Swakelola system, the government can distribute a certain amount of
funds (in this case, the Administrative/ Institutional Development funds of Rp 100 million
= $ 12,000) to local/regional centers that have been delegated authority to initiate various
institutional development activities, such as administration & financial management, and
program planning. In the Kontraktual system, Regional Centers submit program proposals
to the National Sea Partnership Team who will assess the proposals before approving the
fund distribution. Funds from both of these sources would be transferred in multiple installments, pending progress reports and monitoring from the National Office.
As was previously mentioned, there was a problem in getting the authorized funds to the
universities in a timely fashion in Year One. As of August 2003, eight months into the Initiative, only the National Development Budget (APBN) had been distributed to finance the
program in conjunction with CRMP (Proyek Pesisir)’s small grants and other contributions
to help initiate the program. During phases of policy change and reauthorization of a national budget to new actors, setting up a new mechanism and policies for the distribution
of money can be quite difficult and frustrating. Defining a new funding mechanism for the
Sea Partnership was such a case of bureaucracy falling behind innovation. The accounting
office and national regulations did not know how to handle the locally-determined grants
approach, preferring that the national government write the grant proposals and have the
regions compete for the funds - clearly this was not port of vision of the SPP's “bottom-up”
and local priorities approach. In addition, the national regulations defined some of the funds
going to support staff implementing governmental objectives, with the universities as grant
recipients. The Ministry's accounting office did not understand how to develop a system of
checks and balances where NGOs, private sector, the university or others could implement
governmental programs. How could it pay a Jakarta university professor to mentor a National
Office program grant recipient in the regions?
This problem required the participation and dedicated efforts of several smart and high-level
people throughout the agency to develop administrative adjustments and a change in the
classification of the initiative so that Sea Partnership programs could be implemented following the principles of the Intiative without violating national regulations. This problem was
discussed with the Ministry’s Legal Division and others for a strategic solution and better
implementation in the second year, i.e. 2004. Simply put, the institution (the Ministry) was
willing but the regulations were not accommodating! During 2003, a short-term administration mechanism was eventually used to help support the flexible and cooperative needs of
the pilot program. Programmatic funds started flowing in three installments to the Regional
Centers in September 2003.
The seed money provided in the first year through the national budget will be supported in
the future with additional national level funding mandated after approval of the new Coastal
Management Law, and through regional budgets approved by local parliaments.
39
Developing The Indonesian Partnership Program
series of three workshops for the Sea Partnership Program were conducted during the October
2002 to September 2003 period. For each of these workshops, MMAF invited approximately
80 to 200 people to meet and discuss the design and the business of the new Initiative. The
first two workshops were held in Jakarta, and the third was held on-site at one of the Regional
Centers, creating a precedent that the Ministry is hoping to institutionalize: one workshop
each year in Jakarta and one workshop each year at one of the Regional Centers. Jakarta
is the home for almost half of the Sea Partnership workshop participants and therefore is the
most cost-effective place to host a workshop. However, conducting workshops at a Regional
Center could accommodate cross visits between Centers, could provide the host institutions
40
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
5
The National Workshops
A
a better forum for describing and demonstrating their program, and could allow
for the larger national Sea Partnership group to participate in certain aspects of
the site's program evaluation. The Workshops are described collectively here
because they each marked a major stage or a “snapshot” in the development
and implementation process of the new initiative and in the participants’ perspectives.
5.1 Workshop #1, October 2002: The Launch
The first Sea Partnership Workshop was the largest as it not only announced the launch of
the program but also the names of the first set of Regional Centers. The invited participants
included more than 50 people from the Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, including
representatives from several different divisions. Other invitees included leading experts from
the selected Regional Universities, other universities, several other ministries (Environment,
Forestry), various research agencies (LIPE), and representatives from local governments,
environmental NGOs and other stakeholder representatives. The workshop objectives were
to describe the justification for starting a Sea Partnership Program, introduce the U.S. Sea
Grant Model, announce the Regional Centers and then, with these participants, start to define the principles and structure of the Indonesian Sea Partnership Initiative. The Workshop
was scheduled for the third week in October 2002 in Jakarta. The U.S. Sea Grant Program
had agreed to send Dr. Robert Stickney, Director of the Texas State Program, to Jakarta to
present the U. S. model and to serve as an advisor to the Ministry as it began these key early
strategic planning steps and design. Representatives from Japan and Australia were also
planning on presenting their similar programs to the Workshop participants. The workshop
was hosted by the Ministry and sponsored by the CRMP/Proyek Pesisir.
Unfortunately, the tragic bombing incident in Bali just before the Workshop changed its program and the level of technical support possible. Due to security reasons, Dr. Stickey was
not allowed to travel to Indonesia, the Japanese and Australian representatives declined,
and the Ex-Patriate Senior Technical Advisor and Director for the CRMP were advised to
temporarily leave Indonesia, and therefore were not able to attend. Despite this disappointment, the workshop proceeded quite well with a CRMP Indonesian technical staff and the
Ministry’s staff leading and managing the program.
The workshop was kicked-off with speeches from both the Minister of National Education
and the Minister of Marine Affairs and Fisheries (MMAF). The outputs of the workshop were
41
Developing The Indonesian Partnership Program
agreements from most participants on several strategic issues regarding with the implementation of Sea Partnership Program in Indonesia including the following:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The Sea Partnership Program is expected to provide a significant contribution to coastal
and marine development in Indonesia by improving the quality and professionalism of
human resources; by identifying new financial sources and innovations for solving local
problems in the coastal and marine sector; and by increasing the role of universities in
transferring technology and research results to the public and users.
There are three main steps that are needed in developing the Sea Partnership Program
(SPP): (i) a Planning Step, where strategic issues, the scope of the initiative, implementation, monitoring and evaluation phase are developed. (ii) a Development Step, where
universities and research institutions would be utilized as key assets in developing the
program, and coordination among relevant stakeholders would be developed; and (iii) an
Organizational Step, where multi-departmental institutions would be formed to implement
the program efficiently.
During the initial phase of the program, financial aspects will be managed by close cooperation among central government, universities, research institutions, local government,
and private sector partners in an open and transparent way. Trust funds, levies and grants
should be considered for the universities as well as other innovative mechanisms.
Implementation of the program should be based on lessons learned during the pilot phase.
Lessons can be gained from having good documentation of the first year program.
The long-term program should be developed to include the involvement of many strata in
universities (Students, lecturers, researchers, professors, Deans, etc.).
In implementing the SPP, other relevant stakeholders such as LIPI (national research
institute), BPPT (maritime board). private sector, NGOs, the public, and international organizations (IUCN, international conservation NGOs, etc.) should also be involved.
It was agreed that the Directorate General of CSI should not dominate the National Center,
but should also invite other Directorate Generals in the Ministry (Captive Fisheries, Culture
Fisheries, etc.) into the decision-making for the program. Interdepartmental institutions
should be included.
Focus theme areas of the Sea Partnership Program should include (i) Outreach for applied
research and coastal management activities; (ii) Marine product incubation businesses and
venture capital support (iii) Restoration, rehabilitation and revitalization of coastal areas (iv)
Spatial planning for coasts and small islands and (v) Social services and coastal facilities/
infrastructure. (NOTE: These themes were changed in the May 2002 workshop.)
Institutional structures and operating mechanisms, development and focus themes of the
program should be discussed further.
Most participants agreed with the idea of implementing Sea Partnership Program (SPP)
in Indonesia and the program was officially launched.
Reports from participants at this workshop said it had been excellent. Everyone was excited
about the concept, understood the benefits to Indonesia for the program and was eager to
start work on the Sea Partnership Program. Sea Grant-like programs seem to stimulate enthusiasm. Immediately after this workshop, Dr. Pratikto and Dr. Soestrisno from the National
Legislature and Dr. Tighe from the CRMP went to the USA for a study tour that included the
visits to Hawaii, North Carolina, Rhode Island and Washington, DC Sea Grant Programs.
42
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
5.2 Workshop #2, May 2003: Regional Programs
By this point in the 2003 program, the National SPP Working Group had been formed and
had met a few times to monitor the early progress of the Regional Centers: the Regional
Centers had formed their consortia informally, and had been invited to submit proposals for
SPP program activities for FY 2003 (already 5 months in progress). Dr. Pratikto and Ms.
Kusuma from MMAF and Dr. Tighe from CRMP had just returned from their participation in
the U.S. Sea Grant Week business meetings during the last week in April.
On 20-21 May 2003, the Second National Sea Partnership Program Workshop was held in
Jakarta, involving a smaller group of approximately 60 participants from the Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries (primarily the CSI division), Proyek Pesisir/CRMP, the Ministry of
High Education, the National Working Group members from the University of Indonesia (UI),
Institute of Technology of Bandung, Institute of Agriculture of Bogor (IPB), and the 5 (five)
regional centers (East Java, North Sulawesi, West Sumatra, East Kalimantan, and South
Sulawesi). For this workshop, the New York Sea Grant Program and the CRMP/Proyek Pesisir supported the participation of and presentations from Dr. Dale Baker, Associate Director
Sea Grant Program of New York from Cornell University.
One day before the workshop, MMAF conducted a meeting of the National SPP Working
Group attended by approximately 20 people (DG-CSI Staff, University team (UI, ITB, IPB),
Proyek Pesisir/CRMP and Dr. Dale Baker). The meeting was to prepare for the workshop,
review its objectives and outcomes, and to pre-discuss some of the issues with the team
so that they would be prepared to lead discussions in the larger workshop. The criteria for
the evaluation of the proposals from the Regional Centers was prepared by the CRMP and
given preliminary approval by the National Team. Specific objectives of Workshop #2 were to
review of the proposals sent in by the Regional Centers, to finalize criteria for evaluating the
proposals with the larger group of participants at the workshop, to listen to and discuss Dr.
Baker’s presentations to the Working Group on writing proposals, plus to get an introduction
to Sea Grant Strategic Plans and the U.S. Extension Programs.
During the opening of the Workshop, both the U.S. Sea Grant model (presented by Dr.
Baker) and the Sea Partnership Program (presented by Dr. Pratikto) were reviewed for the
participants as another opportunity to harmonize the visions of what the new Initiative was
trying to accomplish. There was a lively discussion, and clearly a number of questions remaining from the members of the Regional Centers on how the program would work, most
of which were satisfied in the discussions. For the three Regional Centers that had submitted
proposals, the participants broke into mixed working groups and each group reviewed one
set of proposals from a single Regional Center against the criteria and then held discussions on the merit of the proposals and the criteria. This was done in a very open, collegial
(non-critical) way, just comparing the proposal to the criteria and commenting on needed
improvements. This turned out to be an excellent way to clarify the goals of the program to
a number of participants as that they saw the checklist of criteria and could compare a real
proposal to the mandate, while at the same time discuss the relevance of the mandate or
the criteria to the Initiative.
43
Developing The Indonesian Partnership Program
Other notes, recommendations, restatement of principles and outputs from the workshop
participants for the program leadership included:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The Sea Partnership is a program that focuses on the partnerships between the Ministry
of Marine Affairs and Fisheries (MAAF), especially DG/CSI, with some universities, local
governments, private sectors, and NGOs.
All parties are directed to develop cooperation between central and local institutions, to
increase institutional and human resources capacity, and to continue building trust and
collaboration among the stakeholders.
The program will focus on 4 (four) main types of activities: i.e., outreach, extension, analysis
and policy recommendation, and applied research.
Proposals for three of the Consortia had been reviewed during the workshop and were
awaiting corrections from the Regional Centers for final approvals.
The problems with the development of the consortia and proposals in the other two districts
were discussed and recommendations were given.
For year 2003, the multi-stakeholder consortiums or alliances led by the host university
will be formalized and strengthened effectively.
For year 2003, each Regional Center will receive about 291 million Rupiah, with 100 million
(~$12,000) to be allocated for institutional building of the consortium and with 191 million
(~$23,000) given as seed money for implementing local program activities.
The Regional Centers requested more mentoring and advice as they sited the lack of local
models to follow and the lack of local leadership to help push the program forward. Each
Regional Center was assigned one member of the voluntary National University Team
(from IPB, UI, ITB, UGM) in addition to the MMAF/CSI Director who serves as their liaison
to assist them as mentors in this regard.
The Regional Centers were concerned about the delay in receiving the grant funds from
the National Center. The Regional Centers were either waiting for funds to begin their
work, including strategic planning (3 cases) or were beginning implementation without
money in anticipation of its arrival because of the short timeline for the Year One activities
(2 cases).
It was expected that at the end of December 2003, all Year 1 activities would be completed
and the Year 2 (2004) program developed.
This workshop helped to focus the Ministry and the other participants on the issues and
decisions that needed to be made for the Sea Partnership to move forward. A lot of energy
and thought were collected at this meeting in a couple of days to motivate and re-energize
the various partners and clarify the work that needed to be done next.
The National Sea Partnership Working Group held another meeting shortly after the Second
National Workshop. At this time, the final proposals from the Regional Centers were reviewed
and accepted with minor changes still requested in some cases. The team also constructed
a draft “workplan” for the balance of FY 2003 to define activities that were desirable in the
Initiative such as developing the student programs (for USA/Indonesia student exchanges,
degree programs, internships, etc.), recruiting new partners particularly from the private sector,
NGOs and the other ministries, debating the expansion of the number of Regional Centers
for Year Two, creating the monitoring and evaluation plan for Year One and afterwards, etc.
44
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
Various assignments were delegated to the various team members for follow-up, including
regular visits by each Directors to their designated Regional Center to monitor its progress
5.3 Workshop #3 September 2003: Implementation Issues
By this time in Year One of the program (8½ months), all of the Regional Centers had received some institutional development money (as late as August, two of the centers had not
yet requested funds as they had not finalized the approved Consortium structure and MOU
with the Ministry), and all had received approval for their proposals for programmatic activities. In addition, the MMAF/CSI division had published its first Bulletin for outreach (bulletin
P3K, Edisi Perdana, September 2003) and the lead story (four pages) was about the Sea
Partnership Program. The article contained helpful information such as all of the contact
information for the Regional Centers and the Working Group Team Members that had been
assigned to support specific Regional Centers, the proposed workplan for the balance of
the FY 2003, a summary of the outputs from the first two workshops, etc. This was widely
circulated within the Ministry and other national governmental offices, and was sent to many
of the regional marine offices and universities and other stakeholders. Also, at this time the
CRMP/Proyek Pesisir had just completed and closed its project (August 31, 2003) and the
new USAID Coastal Resources Management Project II (CRMP II) was just started and was
getting organized (September 15th). Several of the Sea Partnership team members from the
CRMP/Proyek Pesisir were hired onto the new USAID CRMP 2 so there was good continuity
for the Ministry and the Initiative.
The Third National Sea Partnership Workshop was held in East Java, hosted by that Regional
Center on 17-19 September 2003. The MMAF had only budgeted two workshops in Year One,
and all agreed another workshop was needed but there was not sufficient budget in either
the MMAF, the Regional Center or in the CRMP/Project Pesisir (which was completed and
closed on September 1, 2003). Once again, the National SPP Working Group declared that
everyone would have to share the costs of this workshop. The response was very rewarding, contributions were made (often in-kind) from several sources, with the Regional Center
making all the arrangements. This included a Provincial government bus picking up all the
participants as they arrived at the airport, and transporting them via road and ferry to the
venue at the university, and university buses transporting the participants to and from the
venue daily. In order to reduce costs (and because there were limited hotel options near the
venue) several participants were invited to stay at the university guesthouse and the others
were lodged at a nearby small hotel. All of the Regional Centers paid for the travel of their
own group of one to five people, either with institutional development money or with university
core budget (in-kind). The results of the budget sharing are presented in Figure 5.
The objectives of this workshop were a) for the Regional Centers to report their program
status and descriptions of their local program design to the MMAF National Sea Partnership
Team, b) for the larger group to work together to discuss and resolve some remaining administrative issues needed for the government-university relationships to flourish, and c) for
everyone in the initiative to discuss strategic plans and the possibility of focusing on creating
these for the Regional Centers and National Office for Year Two. In addition, NOAA had
45
Developing The Indonesian Partnership Program
volunteered to support the travel and participation of two senior staff for a week to Indonesia
to join the workshop as advisors to the Initiative on strategic planning, and extension. Mr.
Rene Eppi of the Office of International Affairs/OAR and Dr. Jim Murray, Director of Extension in the National Sea Grant Office would make presentations, join in the working groups
at the Workshop, and then stay a few more days in Indonesia to start the development of a
Southeast Asia Regional Sea Grant Program with MMAF and the Thai institute leader (who
was invited to join the workshop). There were also plans to work with one of the Regional
Centers on developing a pilot Extension Program for Year 2. Due to their experience in Sea
Grant, their participation in addressing some of the administrative and strategic issues would
have been most valuable, and it was the first time for the U.S. Sea Grant Partners to see the
Indonesian program first hand.
Unfortunately, due to a heightening in the security warnings, the NOAA officials were not
allowed to travel to Indonesia and the CRMP Senior Technical Advisor made the presentation at the workshop on Strategic Planning and a Director in MMAF/CSI made an excellent
presentation about the U.S. Sea Grant funding and organizational structures in their places.
This change in plans was very disappointing, but it still did not hamper the discussions and
outcomes of the workshop. The Governor of the Province opened the event to demonstrate
his awareness and support for the Sea Partnership Initiative, followed by MMAF leaders.
Each of the Regional Centers presented their program and status, and the afternoon sessions were used to address business issues and partnership structures. The last morning
was used to visit a field sight for a local Sea Partnership activity, a provincial rehabilitation
project in the mangrove on Madura Island.
Several general observations were made during discussions at the workshop. The Regional
Centers and MMAF are getting much more serious about the Sea Partnership Program and
are really demonstrating in conversations that they understand the objectives, issues and
model fairly well to excellently. The issues discussed were real pragmatic, operational issues,
and their understanding of the Sea Partnership scheme was impressively more advanced
than at the previous Workshop in May 2003. For those Regional Centers who chose to wait
for funding before begining their activities, there was some concern that they also might
not have done enough detailed planning of staffing, detailed budgets and schedules so
that when the money is transferred they can start immediately. This added delay for them
to finish their planning may impact their ability to deliver their activities by the end of the
year. Also, even for those Regional Centers that have begun activities, it is not clear that
they have resolved the internal university cash monitoring and distribution arrangements to
distribute the Sea Partnership money once it arrives at their doorstep. All of these observations, good or bad, demonstrate the challenges of designing an initiative simultaneous with
its implementation.
Some of the outputs of the workshop included the following:
• The bureaucratic mechanism for budget transfer from MMAF to the Regional Centers was
still not complete and may still require a major effort to resolve. This is limiting motivation
and time to complete the work. However, the issue has reached the highest levels of the
MMAF agency for resolution and an end of the problem is in sight for Year One.
• The organizational development of the five Regional Centers has progressed to the early
46
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
•
•
stages of multi-stakeholder groups rather than small government-university planning teams
that were the early contact groups. All five Regional Centers have a charter, a formal structure and some form of a larger stakeholder advisory group. This is a great step forward in
Indonesian program planning, but as there are some concerns about representation issues
among the stakeholders, there may need to be some minor changes in the future.
Through their own initiative the five Regional Centers signed an agreement in support of
MMAF’s Sea Partnership Program and requested that the central government continue
it, and committed to continuing to do their parts in the program.
The Regional Centers agreed to follow a more open solicitation of proposals for Year
Two, and are awaiting the guidance from the National Office for both the development of
proposals and for development of the overall Partnership Program. The Regional Centers
have requested some guidance on oversight and how to manage these funds for their
Consortia.
This workshop, held at one of the Regional Centers, allowed that Center to showcase their
program, but it also gave them a rare opportunity to build their program. In asking for their
partners, particularly the government, to assist with this landmark event (it will probably be ten
years or more before another National Sea Partnership Workshop will be held in Surabaya)
they got the attention of the local leaders, and an opportunity to describe and to campaign
for governmental support and increased commitment. The local government leaders were
pleased to participate because they get face time with leaders from the Ministry in Jakarta,
and have an opportunity to publicly support a decentralized partnership that is a plus for their
own political standing. If used properly, with a good communications program before and
after the event, several new partners and partnerships could be identified and committed in
association with the workshop. The newsworthiness of hosting 50 to 60 prestigious guests
from throughout the nation and even international guests creates a window of opportunity to
socialize their program locally, including inviting potential partners or news reporters to the
sessions for their edification and to inform their reports in the news media afterwards. Best of
all, it gives the host Regional Center 50-60 coastal experts to approach for help with various
questions and problems and issues for their region. That benefit is priceless.
47
Developing The Indonesian Partnership Program
6
Discussion
6.1 Status of Year One (2003)
T
he September 2003 Surabaya Workshop was a turning point for some people who
were just “going with the flow”, waiting for the momentum to move them forward.
The solution of the money distribution, the peer pressure from the other Regional
Centers, and the looming end-of-year deadline for their activities in December
promoted actions in words and spirit. Everyone was focused on productivity and planning
for the future of the program. The National Working Group will continue to develop proposal
criteria and other guidance for the Regional Centers for 2004, and determine how best to
conduct the monitoring, evaluation and final report for Year One. In addition, the CSI Directors
will continue to liaison with their assigned Regional Centers and monitor their progress so
that the Centers can receive their second and third (November and December) instalments
of their grants. The Regional Centers and the central universities have all been asked to
recruit some excellent potential undergraduate students who might qualify and want admittance into a Masters Degree program in the USA; these students will be helped to apply to
one or more of several Sea Grant universities in hopes that the Sea Partnership Program
and the U.S. State Sea Grant offices can place the Indonesian student in a funded Sea
Grant research project or as an intern in their education program. The last few months of
the year were dominated by the Holy Month of Ramadan, followed by the Christian holiday
of Christmas, as well as many end-of-the-year deadlines for all the governmental programs
so MMAF and local governmental and university staff will be realistically occupied elsewhere
until January 2004.
6.2 Plans for Year Two (2004)
The Sea Partnership Program has been promised continued funding for FY 2004, but the
amount is not yet determined. MMAF plans to implement a second year of the program,
making a few changes and adding more structure for Year Two. Some of these proposed
changes are descried below:
i. Number and Identity of the Regional Centers: The five original Regional Centers will be
continued into Year Two. In addition, at the request of the Minister and the regions, each
Regional Center will be asked to adopt or “mentor” two new universities, bringing the total
to 15 centers. These new centers will be “little brothers” in that they will have some but not
all of the privileges and resources as the original five Regional Centers during their initial
48
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
year. For instance, the plan is to offer the new Regional Centers the same institutional
development funds that the original five centers get, but not to provide programmatic
funds to them yet. The rationale is that it will take a year for the new institution to create a
consortium, develop partnerships, determine its local priorities, find bureaucratic solutions
for cash flow and learn the Sea Partnership System. In the meantime, the Institutional
development funds allow representatives of the new university or consortium to conduct
local organizing workshops, to conduct cross-visits to its “big brother” Regional Center to
learn how to operate a program and to attend the two National Sea Partnership Workshops
planned for 2004.
ii. Structure of the National Working Group/Program: Now that the kind of work and advisory
inputs are more clearly understood in a first-hand way, the structure and roles and the
responsibilities of the National Sea Partnership Working Group will be reconsidered and
a) made more formal in the form of an organizational document (Mission, Vision, Structure, Goals, etc.; to replace the letter from the Director General of MMAF/CSI appointing
people to the group), and b) possibly discriminate between the roles of the workers and the
advisors, including beginning to pay the university advisors who provide specific services.
There is still reluctance to create a formal National Advisory Council (or to mandate Local Advisory Boards) at this time because of the additional layer of bureaucracy that will
result, and perhaps, a premature limit to the control the Ministry has on the development
of the program. A suggestion has been made that some of the benefits from the input of
these leaders of the various related sectors might be achieved, for the short term, with
a high-level forum called once or twice during Year Two to provide recommendations
and perspectives to the Sea Partnership Program. This small step might help to identify
the roles and the types of leaders wanted on such an advisory board once, and if, it is
established. Forums could also serve to develop the awareness to this broader group of
leaders of the Sea Partnership’s existence and mission, bring in new partners, and raise
the profile of the initiative.
iii. Capacity of the Partners: There is a clear need and desire to build the capacity and skills of
those partners in the Regional Centers (and even, to a smaller extent, those in the National
Center) to conduct the new kinds of activities utilized in the Sea Partnership Program.
These new types of tasks include but are not limited to: managing projects, facilitating
meetings and partnerships, conducting public hearings and resolving conflicts, developing
innovative partnerships, writing and reviewing proposals, communicating findings to the
users and the public in various ways, and understanding integrated coastal management,
etc. Creating a professional development program to build these skills (with mentoring and
support from the USAID Project CRMP II, implemented by the National Center Universities) has been discussed, and perhaps would be institutionalized in one of the National
Center’s advisory universities for the future. In addition, to help the partners (in particular
the university hosts and facilitators of the program) to understand the Sea Grant model
more intuitively, a possible cross-visit is being considered to the Hawaii Sea Grant Program
for an orientation and first-hand demonstration of the breadth and character of the various
activities in an island-based, mature partnership program. This will be determined by the
budget and collaborative workplan between the Ministry and the USAID CRMPII (and any
other sources of funding available to the Ministry) during 2004/Year Two.
49
Developing The Indonesian Partnership Program
iv. NOAA and State Sea Grant Partners: Hopefully, the relationships between the Indonesian
and United States partnership programs will continue and possibly grow stronger during
Year Two. NOAA/National has repeated its willingness to send one or more of its professional staff to support the Indonesian program in its strategic planning, monitoring and
evaluation, program developments, etc. For instance, when the Sea Partnership begins
to develop its extension or communication programs (see below), NOAA might help with
an advisor during a workshop in the USA or in Indonesia. There has been a suggestion
that a State Sea Grant Program Director be invited to Indonesia to run a tutoring/mentoring
session for the Regional Sea Partnership Center Directors. In these cases, costs for
travel, expenses and salary might be shared between the U.S. and Indonesian partners
in some agreed-upon way. The visits to Indonesia will also depend on the security situation and USAID clearance for visitors on this program. A few of the State Sea Grant
Directors already acquainted with the Indonesian program have agreed to facilitate and
invite Indonesian students or Sea Partnership leaders to visit and work in their programs
as “shadows”, interns, Fellows (perhaps through a Fulbright or other Fellowship), visiting
faculty, research assistants, etc. This sort of cross visit could be for a few days or the
duration of a Masters degree, as appropriate. Specifically, NOAA has offered an invitation
to the Ministry to second one of their staff in the NOAA/OAR Office of International Affairs
for one or two years to learn about the U.S Sea Grant and other coastal programs, and
to facilitate the development of both the Indonesian Sea Partnership with the U.S.A. and
the proposed Southeast Asian Regional Sea Grant Program. There is a mutual desire to
implement this, and sources of funding are currently being sought. In addition, there is
frequent correspondence between the two national programs based upon existing relationships for information, comments, etc. Depending on the time and other priorities, the
Indonesian Regional Centers may try to link some of their 2004 programmatic activities to
those already proposed by one or more U.S. State Sea Grant Programs (after discussions
with the U.S. partners) to start building Regional Center-to-U.S. State Program relations
directly. This has been discussed in the long-term model for the Sea Partnership, but may
have to wait until other operational and capacity issues are addressed.
v. Extension Program: One objective added to the general development of the Sea Partnership Program for Year Two is the specific task of initiating a formal Extension Program at
one of the Regional Centers as a pilot and model for the other Regional Centers. One
primary definition of extension in Indonesia, the transfer and training of information to users, is practiced in the government (e.g., the Agriculture Ministry) and elsewhere, but this
does not encompass the much broader and interactive dynamics seen in the U.S. Sea
Grant Extension Programs. In order to develop this strength, first the Sea Partnership
must develop the human capacity in terms of Extension Specialists in various fields who
understand the broader extension process and can lead it. How to accomplish this task is
still unclear, but the present plan is for the Sea Partnership National Program, the North
Sulawesi Regional Center and the USAID CRMP II to work together to develop a pilot
activity and program, hopefully with some mentoring from the U.S. Sea Grant Program.
North Sulawesi has both experience in community-based coastal management in many of
the stakeholders, and the presence of a field office of the CRMP II for close involvement
in jointly developing and supporting this activity.
50
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
vi.Student Program: The university students of today hold the promise of the future of the Sea
Partnership and other good coastal management practices in Indonesia. As mentioned,
at least four U.S. State Sea Grant Programs have agreed to help mentor Indonesian marine students in some way, possibly even in supporting their entrance into the graduate
program of their institution, if appropriate. Any form of student engagement or exchange
(U.S. Students coming to Indonesian Sea Partnership Regional Centers to visit or work,
and vice versa) could help to build Sea Partnership Regional Center technical staff as
extension, communication or education specialists, as applied research faculty and even
as eventual directors of the Regional Centers or in the National Center. A small group of
the MMAF/CSI team, the central universities and the CRMP II will work in Year Two to
develop a program that will recruit, prepare (TOFL, orientations, etc.), coordinate and possibly support students going to the USA or students from the USA coming to the Regional
Centers for work or visits under the Sea Partnership/Sea Grant Programs.
6.3 Additional Comparisons Between the U.S. and Indonesian Programs
The Indonesia Sea Partnership Program is similar to the U.S. Sea Grant Program in that they
both have strong roles for universities. However, in the U.S. model local universities lead the
program with advisory roles for other partners and stakeholders in deciding strategic priorities.
In Indonesia, local government and private sector stakeholders will most likely also be involved
in awarding grants and in budgeting decisions at the Regional Levels. The two programs are
also similar as both have very broad national goals that allow local and regional programs to
set local priorities as long as they contribute to the national goals. In both the United States
and Indonesia, local programs can have priorities that match some or all national priorities.
Also, in both programs, universities (or in the case of Indonesia, local consortia) develop (or
will develop, in the case of Indonesia Year Two) longer term strategic plans as well annual
work plans that are reviewed by the national level Sea Grant office, but local programs will
retain wide latitude in setting their own priorities within national guidelines.
The U.S. Sea Grant process is similar to the one envisaged by the Directorate General
for Coast and Small Island Affairs for their Sea Partnership program. But there are some
important differences. In Indonesia, based on a combination of nationally and locally set
priorities, consortium members from each Regional Center may submit proposals for funding. These proposals will be reviewed at the local level and forwarded to the national level
for review and comment. However, the national level Indonesia Sea Partnership Program
may not have final approval or rejection authority. The important difference is that regional
and local extension services are envisioned to be funded primarily through regional and local
government budgets, supplemented by private sector contributions, with a lesser amount of
national funding allocated for direct support of regional and local extension programs. As the
National funds are considered “seed money”, and it is expected that programmatic activities
will be principally funded through local budget allocations, a greater degree of review may
reside at the local level. Local budget allocations for regional and local research and extension services will hopefully form a cornerstone of the programs’ contribution to development
of regional economic capacity. This policy will be discussed and considered in Year Two.
51
Developing The Indonesian Partnership Program
6.4 Chronology of the Sea Partnership Program, 1999-2003
From afar, it may appear that the Indonesian program materialized fully formed and functional
in its first year of operation. Naturally, this is not the case. Indeed, it required several long-incoming pre-conditions before the launch of the pilot Initiative. Some of these pre-conditions
include fundamental changes in governmental structure by law, a new ministry, a solid existing
model, several informal discussions, study tours, changes in staff until the right combination
was able to move forward, and several other fortunate coincidental events that led to the
eventual “quick” success of the Sea Partnership Program. As a reminder, a brief chronology
of the process from the passage of the law that created decentralization and the Ministry of
Marine Affairs and Fisheries to the end of the first year of implementation are summarized
below. However, this longer path to the launch of the Initiative should in no way reduce
the merit of the accomplishments of everyone involved in the path up to the launch and the
implementation of Year One: there was a lot of hard work, smart and strategic thinking, and
tons of collaboration that made the difference in the success of the pilot Initiative.
TABLE 1: Summarized Chronology of the Development of the Sea Partnership Program in
Indonesia (1999-2003)
1999
1999
Oct 2000
July 2001
Jan 2002
Jan-Dec 2002
Jun 2002
Oct 2002
Oct-Nov 2002
Jan-Apr 2003
April 2003
May 2003
June 2003
July 2003
Aug 2003
Sept 2003
52
Passage of Indonesian Law 22 that decentralizes government
Establishment of the new Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries
Study Tour on Coastal Zone Law and ICM to USA for new Ministry leaders
Participation in the Coastal Zone ‘01 Conference in the USA
Inclusion of Sea Grant in the Draft National Coastal Management Law
Socializing the Sea Partnership Concept through the Public Consultation
Process for the Draft National Law
The Arrival of a Champion (Dr. Widi Pratikto) for Indonesia’s “Sea Grant”
Sea Partnership Workshop #1: The Launch of the Program, Budgets Approved, and Regional Centers selected
Study Tour to Hawaii, North Carolina, Washington, Rhode Island and
Canada for the State’s Perspective
Program Design (National Level), Development of Regional Center Consortiums and First Proposals at Local Levels
Participation in the USA Sea Grant (Business) Meetings
Sea Partnership Workshop #2: Refining the Model, Reviewing Proposals for Activities in the Five Regional Centers, Creating a Cash Transfer
Mechanism
Final approval of 3 of the Regional Proposals, First institutional development money released for Regional Centers
Participation in Coastal Zone ’03 Conference in the USA
CRMP/Proyek Pesisir closes on August 31st
CRMP II begins on September 15th, with some of the same core staff, but
has not yet completed workplans and budgets and therefore is not able to
support much implementation until October 2003.
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
Sept 2003
Sept 2003
Sep-Dec 2003
Dec 2003
Sea Partnership Workshop #3: Status Reports, Committing to the Program
(First Workshop held at a Regional Center)
First money for program activities arrives at Regional Centers. Last two
Regional Centers get their proposals approved. Cash flow and program
activities begin.
Review Year 1 implementation. Design and plan Year 2.
End of Year 1. Approval of budget for Year 2 and beginning of Year 1 Evaluations.
6.5 Recommendations
In no particular order, a few recommendations for the replication or adaptation of the Sea
Partnership follow. Keeping in mind that a formal, multi-stakeholder evaluation of the first
year’s results and program will be undertaken soon and that will prepare the definitive list of
recommendations, here are some recommendations for the program from the authors:
•
Make the National Sea Partnership Workshops longer. Two days of sessions, especially
if it includes ceremonial openings and teaching presentations on new topics, is not enough.
Two to three days of WORKING GROUP SESSIONS with time to fully resolve issues and
conduct work would be better. Once the time and money has been invested in travelling
to a common location, one additional day of working together can be extremely cost-effective. The U.S. used a full week every other year, but they already have a well-structured
program. Keep the number at two workshops a year for the continued development of
the Program, but make them three full days of working together.
•
Determine a Mechanism for Transfer of Funds Before Implementation Begins. This
issue alone could have lost the good will of many counterparts if it had not been solved.
It almost did, and it put the Regional Centers in the difficult position of trying to conduct a
full year’s program in just a few months. If there is not enough time to create a permanent
mechanism at the start up of your program, find a (legal) shortcut or temporary measure
to implement the transfer of funds.
•
Develop Specific Tasks for Mentors and Liaisons for the Regional Centers as Soon
as Possible. Using national experts to help the Regional Centers serves many fine purposes. However without more specific guidance on the tasks these people are trying to
accomplish, the range of effort and messages sent the different Regional Centers can
and did vary among the team. To equalize the benefit of the advisors and the efficiency of
the liaisons, conduct a brief orientation (half day) every six months or so that these folks
know exactly what they need to do and how, and when to help the Regional Centers. This
should not prevent the mentors and liaisons from providing additional ad hoc advise and
help to their Regional Center in any way.
•
Always Plan a Thorough Pre-Workshop Meeting with the National Team. The few
times this was done made a vast difference in the productivity of the working groups and
in the strength of the messages communicated at each National Workshop.
53
Developing The Indonesian Partnership Program
•
Start the Communications Program as Soon as Possible. Information sheets and effective communication should be intensive in the early promotion of the program, including
email, website, newsletter, etc. to develop partnerships and the matching budgets.
•
Do a little more design of features of the program before beginning implementation.
Even a program designed in real time needs some structure and fully formed elements
before implementation. It might be worth holding a 3-day retreat with a small team to walk
through a whole year’s worth of likely policy and bureaucratic needs to help the pilot’s first
(and second!) years go smoother.
•
Make time or delegate staff sooner to the program. Development and management of
a program is time intensive. The initial phases of the pilot initiative could have been less
confusing and could have proceeded more smoothly and quickly if everyone involved
had dedicated more time to the initiative at an earlier point. From the Ministry staff, to the
CRMP and university advisors to the lead players at the regional level, other activities
reduced the time available to spend working on the initiative. With a little more staff time,
there could have been many more or better design features completed in Year One. On
the other hand, even design and implementation time squeezed out of other activities
was adequate to get the pilot approved for a second year. In the case of Indonesia's Sea
Partnership Program, the first year(s) of design and implementation were not pre-planned
or provided specific resources, it was just using a window of opportunity to develop the
program. For others wanting to start such an initiative, use this lesson learned to encourage
your agencies and home institutions to provide the staff time early on in the program.
•
Require work plans and detailed budgets of the local Activity Leaders after the
proposals are approved. The local activities were approved based on very simple, brief
descriptions and one-to-three-line budgets in the pre-proposals. In many cases nothing
else was ever generated on paper to reflect the realistic planning of the activity, and it was
certainly done in several cases “just in time” to get the money and start the activity. Since
planning promotes success, the Regional Centers and the National Office could require
detailed work plans soon after approval so that the activity leaders have truly thought
through their program and solved potential logistical problems in advance of the work.
•
Think carefully about the Advocacy issue. The precautionary principle advises conservative thinking until one is certain. If Indonesia believes that advocacy is required
for success, how would it hurt to try the non-advocacy approach for 2 years to test their
theory? The concern is that once the program is branded as biased due to advocacy for
one set of stakeholders over another, or even gives the perception of bias, it will take a
long time to repair the loss of trust. If nothing else, hold a forum about this issue with a
U.S. Sea Grant leader to better understand the definitions of advocacy in this setting, and
the ramifications of either including or excluding it in a Partnership Program.
•
Continue to use strategic study tours and international advanced graduate training
to enlighten and motivate innovators and agents of change. Key to the success of
developing the new initiative was clearly the academic and global awareness and training of many of the central Indonesian players in the program. From Minister Dahuri’s
54
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
enduring relationships in Canada and Dr. Pratikto’s in North Carolina, to Dr. Soetrisno’s
training and experience in Hawaii’s university system. The important roles as innovators
that these leaders now hold rely on and are strengthen by their international education
and experiences. This is not based upon the QUALITY of the experience (although that
may hold some weight in some cases), but as much the exposure to different ways of
thinking that opens the recipient to more creativity than someone who only has only the
status quo to use as a base of experience. The elements of their success attributed to high
quality international education demonstrates the need to continue this type of training in
the next generation of coastal scientists and experts. The success of well-designed study
tours speak for themselves in the results produced by the cross-visits (within Indonesia
or internationally) conducted for this initiative.
•
Continue to Promote Volunteerism, Sharing, Responsibility among all People and
Institutions who Participate. 81,000 kilometers of coast are too many for government
alone to manage or steward, and 17,500 islands over 3 time zones too complex and remote
for efficient paid staff to handle. In the USA the Sea Grant Program is approximately $100
million/year and they have a small percentage of the coastal areas to manage compared
to Indonesia. Voluntary service, whether it is participating in organizing a beach clean up
or measuring mangrove diameters in your community every year or serving as an advisor
on a board, should be encouraged. This approach works best when people give and get
the rewards from shared efforts.
•
Work to Maintain the Friendly, Non-Competitive Attitude Between all the Players
From the Start. With the exception of a few rare instances, almost all of the work was
accomplished in a very friendly and supportive manner. It made the Sea Partnership Program one of the easiest initiatives to work with, promote and support.
55
Developing The Indonesian Partnership Program
References
Allen G and M. Aldrim (in press). Coral Reef Fishes of Indonesia. Zoological Studies.
Coastal Resources Management Project, 2000. National Attitudinal Survey; National Benchmark Study Exploration & Measurement of Public Attitude to Conservation & Use of
Marine Resources, produced by Consensus MBL under contract to Coastal Resources
Center, Univeristy of Rhode Island.
Directorate General of Forestry, Directorate of Protection and Nature Conservation, 2003.
Djohani, R., 1989.Marine Conservation in Indonesia. WWF Indonesia.
Erdmann MV, Caldwell RL, and MK Moosa (1998). Indonesian “King of the sea” discovered.
Nature.395: 335.
Intercoast, 2001. Intercoast News Letter, No. 38, Winter 2001, Coastal Resources Center,
University of Rhode Island.
Jakarta Post, 21 May 03
Kahn B. 2002. Discussion paper on the establishment of a Protected Marine Mammal Fisheries Area in Indonesia’s national and EEZ waters. TNC Indonesia program. Technical report prepared for the Government of Indonesia’s Ministry of Marine Affairs and
Fisheries. 55 pp.
Knight, Maurice. 2001. The United States Experience in Decentralized Coastal Management: Lessons for Indonesia (Desentralisasi Pengelolaan Wilayah Pesisir di Amerika
Serikat: Contoh bagi Indonesia), published by Coastal Resources Center, University
of Rhode Island.
Knight, M. and Lowry, K. 2003. Institutional Arrangements for Decentralized Coastal Management in Indonesia. Indonesian Journal of Coastal and Marine Resources, Special
Edition No. 1, pp. 95-107, Center for Coastal and Marine Resources Studies, Bogor
Agricultural Institute (IPB), Bogor.
Lourie SA and JE Randall. 2003. A new species of pygmy seahorse, Hippocampus denise,
from the Indo-Pacific. Zoological Studies. 42(2): 284-291.
UNEP-WCMC. 2001. The World Atlas of Coral Reefs. United Nations Environment Programme.
U.S. Sea Grant Association (2000). Sea Grant in the 21st Century: A vision for Success
Veron JEN. 2000. Corals of the World. Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS), Townsville.
Wilkinson C. 2000. Status of Coral Reefs of the World: 2000. AIMS. Townsville.
World Wide Fund for Nature, 1994
World Resources Institute, 2001Small Islands Development
Marine Conservation
56
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
Figure 1:
The Organizational Structure of the Sea Partnership Program
57
Developing The Indonesian Partnership Program
Figure 2:
Current Theme Areas for the U.S. Sea Grant Program
58
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
Figure 3:
University Based Regional Implementation Structure
59
Developing The Indonesian Partnership Program
Figure 4:
Sources and Allocation of Budget for Sea Partnership Program in Indonesia
60
Developing The Indonesian Sea Partnership Program
Figure 5:
Partnership Analysis: Sea Grant Workshop #3
61